Bangkok Ranks 3rd In Global Top 20 Destination Cities

[ginjag]

The VAST majority of people traveling to Thailand spend time in Bangkok regardless if it is where they will spend their entire vacation and/or business trip.

Maybe it's because they all fly into there and use their Mastercard at the airport to get cash out of the ATM.

[notime]

I don't believe it either. It must be "in the counting".

The Bangkok airport latest total passenger numbers are 8,564,503 per year:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World%27s_busiest_airports_by_passenger_traffic

"One passenger is described as someone who arrives in, departs from, or transfers through the airport on a given day".

Obviously not all passengers are international visitors. Some, quite a big number are Thai right? Yet they somehow got the number to 11.5 million of international visitors to Bkk! Even if some (not many) arrive by other means than air the count is a total crap! The international survey probably relayed on "make-believe" TAT statistics as of course they wouldn't make they own research would they?

But it all helps Thai superiority mentality. Come down of Earth and look at yourself without rose-colored glasses. Maybe than you can act and really improve yourself and your country.

[Bkkorupcountry]

I don't believe it either. It must be "in the counting".

The Bangkok airport latest total passenger numbers are 8,564,503 per year:

http://en.wikipedia....ssenger_traffic

"One passenger is described as someone who arrives in, departs from, or transfers through the airport on a given day".

Obviously not all passengers are international visitors. Some, quite a big number are Thai right? Yet they somehow got the number to 11.5 million of international visitors to Bkk! Even if some (not many) arrive by other means than air the count is a total crap! The international survey probably relayed on "make-believe" TAT statistics as of course they wouldn't make they own research would they?

But it all helps Thai superiority mentality. Come down of Earth and look at yourself without rose-colored glasses. Maybe than you can act and really improve yourself and your country.

Do you have any idea how many people transfer through Bkk? For eg, LH flies from KL to Fra via Bkk. RJ flies from KL to Amman via Bkk. Unlike FIT rates, TG offers good group rates so a lot of tour groups from Indonesia, Malaysia, Phillipines, Hong Kong and Vietnam connects via Bangkok.

[Bkkorupcountry]

I just don't know who makes this crap up.

My mind considered Paris, Rome, New York and then I'm told that grubby, dirty Bangkok is third.

Really?

A city with no architecture, features, museums,art galleries ................zilch. You can't get round the place other than by rail and then it's impossible to move when you get out. The pavements are unwalkable, the pollution unbreathable and the heat unbearable.

Then there's Sydney, Milan, Munich, Barcelona, Madrid, Amsterdam, Prague ...........................

Mastercard? Master Bollux.

Correct me if I'm wrong but the majority of your posts are less than complimentary about Bangkok and Thailand. Pray tell, what unfortunate circumstances have befallen you that you are so obviously forced against your will to live here? More houses to paint due a a thriving property market?

[Tibo27]

Bangkok being the third most visited city in Asia would make sense, but "in the world" that is simply pathetic. Definitively if cities such as Madrid or Rome are way less visited than Bangkok, is it for me nothing but very sad.

I love Bangkok but take out the night life and there isn't much thing attractive, not at least enough when you compare to historical cities we have in Europe. Not saying Bangkok does not worth it, but I feel a bit surprised to obviously see that people lost complete interest in historical cities and monuments.

As for London being expensive and beautiful, Paris is really similar. There is way more attractive places than what you've listed Wolf5370. I understand you are not from Paris so difficult to know them all, but we must have as much as you, depending on what people wants to do (and please don't put Euro Disney as an imp0rtant attraction in Paris, that is just offensive !!!lol)

Paris is horribly expensive as well, and others very nice cities in France are as charming as Paris, but does not have the reputation.

As for me London always had a "mystical" image, beautiful and full of secret, London is very attractive I would say and I am not surprised to see it in first place. However I thought honeslty (and nothing to do with me being french haha) that Paris was first.

[DP25]

I don't believe it either. It must be "in the counting".

The Bangkok airport latest total passenger numbers are 8,564,503 per year:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World%27s_busiest_airports_by_passenger_traffic

"One passenger is described as someone who arrives in, departs from, or transfers through the airport on a given day".

Obviously not all passengers are international visitors. Some, quite a big number are Thai right? Yet they somehow got the number to 11.5 million of international visitors to Bkk! Even if some (not many) arrive by other means than air the count is a total crap! The international survey probably relayed on "make-believe" TAT statistics as of course they wouldn't make they own research would they?

But it all helps Thai superiority mentality. Come down of Earth and look at yourself without rose-colored glasses. Maybe than you can act and really improve yourself and your country.

Might want to take off your farang superiority glasses and take a closer look at the link you posted. The 8.5 million at Suvarnabhumi Airport is for passengers SO FAR this year and only includes January and February

In 2010, where they have statistics for the full year, the total passengers according to your link were over 42 million

[dutchweller]

Of course, we won't wonder why, when the protests were going on, all the hotel members bleated and got various breaks from the government. Yet lo and behold, despite all the disruption last year, the global financial crisis, Bangkok had a bumper year?

Also This payout for Hotel members never reached the staff it was a pay out for the Hotel owners only..

Hotel Staff got shafted Forced to use vacation time then forced Leave without pay and no Service charge during the Violence/rioting.

When the Hotels got a government payout for the loss of revenue the staff never saw a penny.

At least I know that is what happened at Centara hotel and Convention center.

[puipuitom]

Typical Thai narsistic behaviour:

Have hardly an idea, what happens outside their country, but will turn all statistic information upside down and right mirrored to find a way to rank their own country high(er)

Never thought of.. visitors useing AmEx, Visa or.. like 99% of all Europeans: not a credit card but a debit card or simple.. cash.

Compared to all Euopean and US cities: Bangkok is far more poluted, more traffic jam, lower interest of the population in the environment and a far higher level of swindling foreigners.

Seen my experience , visiting Thailand for business since 1978, living in Chonburi for 1993-95, sorry: I hold my opinion.

[notime]

I don't believe it either. It must be "in the counting".

The Bangkok airport latest total passenger numbers are 8,564,503 per year:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World%27s_busiest_airports_by_passenger_traffic

"One passenger is described as someone who arrives in, departs from, or transfers through the airport on a given day".

Obviously not all passengers are international visitors. Some, quite a big number are Thai right? Yet they somehow got the number to 11.5 million of international visitors to Bkk! Even if some (not many) arrive by other means than air the count is a total crap! The international survey probably relayed on "make-believe" TAT statistics as of course they wouldn't make they own research would they?

But it all helps Thai superiority mentality. Come down of Earth and look at yourself without rose-colored glasses. Maybe than you can act and really improve yourself and your country.

Might want to take off your farang superiority glasses and take a closer look at the link you posted. The 8.5 million at Suvarnabhumi Airport is for passengers SO FAR this year and only includes January and February

In 2010, where they have statistics for the full year, the total passengers according to your link were over 42 million

My apologies. I didn't look close enough at the small print and took the "2011 statistics" uppermost table as for the full year while in fact the data was for 2 months only. The "2010 statistics" show the number of passengers to be 42,784,967 at Bkk airport. As somebody else mentioned the would include high number of transfer passengers and I believe Thai passengers. But of course this makes the number of 11.5 million international visitors to Bkk possible and much more believable. My mistake. The "farang superiority glasses" are off :-) Although this doesn't mean that things could not be improved here as much in any other country if nations could learn from one another.

[Macmundi]

Bangkok apart, it beats me why London remains so popular. magnificent and lively city that it admittedly is, it is Incredibly expensive, congested, over-crowded and, in IMHO not particularly friendly. I was born there (Greenwich) by the way, but would never want to live there again and visit it rarely these days.

Any fellow Englishmen wish to support our great capital city?

I was wondering that too. But this survey is taken by a credit card, and did you say its incredibly expensive there? Well, maybe thats how it managed to stay up on the top of the list.

[Richb2004v2]

Bangkok apart, it beats me why London remains so popular. magnificent and lively city that it admittedly is, it is Incredibly expensive, congested, over-crowded and, in IMHO not particularly friendly. I was born there (Greenwich) by the way, but would never want to live there again and visit it rarely these days.

Any fellow Englishmen wish to support our great capital city?

Many American's and Australian's visit London - its the "old country" and "sense of history" that's everywhere in London IMO - remember, other than Greenwhich park, the Int. Date Line and the museaums (once the Cutty Sark too - has it been rebuilt yet????) visitors will not generally see the Old Kent Road, or the back roads of Greenwhich. London has building that are far older than some modern civilisations (Tower of London 900 years old - wall at Tower Hill running to the Tower under the road is over 2,000 years old - crown jewels including Star of India) - Tower Bridge, Houses of Parliament (and clocktower - 'Big Ben' is the bell inside it btw), Lizzie's place (Buckingham Palace), Traffalgar Square/Nelson's Column, London Zoo, Westminster Abbey, the parks and so on - and more modern places like the Eye, O2, Madame Tousaurdes (spelling?), London Dungeons, Tate/Tate Modern, Carnaby Street, Oxford Street, Harrod's, Hamley's, Freemason's Hall, so on. In such a small area (city of London is just 1 square mile and cvontains many many very old buildings and churches). We Brits do not realise just how much history we lent to the world and how alluring it is for these future generations to glance back at their roots. The attraction of a real life Monarch (and the ability to nose around Buck House too) is also a good one.

Paris has far fewer attractions IMHO (Louvre, Eiffel Tower, disappointing Euro-disney), but has the allure of being 'Paris' - city of Love. I am surprised Rome does not get more visitors though.

Yes, well put and I cannot disagree with any of that. London has it all, history, modern and innovation. A visitor would certainly need more than just one week to do the place justice. I can understand why the Cty will always be up there.

My point was really a comment upon London's total invincibilty in all such surveys. It is streets ahead of virtually all of the "opposition" in both visitors and visitor spending. This fact surprises me, especially as it is most certainly one of the most expensive places in the World.

P.S. Greenwich aint so bad really. My birthplace and I occasionally visit relatives who remain there and like it.

I only visit London for weekend breaks, but each time we do we have a great time. There is so much to do and see. I also don't find it that expensive if you are careful. Most of the better museums are totally free and are worth visiting again and again. The last time I was there I watched several stand up comedians at a cost of 10 pounds, and that included two free drinks, and was off Leicester square. The parks are all free, as are things like watching the changing of the guard. Accommodation can also be reasonable if you are prepare to stay a tube journey outside the center. The last time I was there I also made a trip to Greenwich park and the observatory. It was beautiful and I hope to visit again with the family. I don't even think places like Bangkok are comparable.

[Bagwan]

Bangkok apart, it beats me why London remains so popular. magnificent and lively city that it admittedly is, it is Incredibly expensive, congested, over-crowded and, in IMHO not particularly friendly. I was born there (Greenwich) by the way, but would never want to live there again and visit it rarely these days.

Any fellow Englishmen wish to support our great capital city?

I agree - as a well-travelled Yorkshireman who unfortunately ended up living for 18 years in London, I found it one of the most expensive and unfriendly places on earth - eventually hating the place and seldom revisit unless I have to. Bangkok is a much better place and much warmer in more ways than one.

As a Londoner. SW19 in fact, I have to agree. London was dirty, graffiti everywhere, the people dressed drably, their body postures spelled out misery to me. I asked a guy with a strange accent where all the English people had got to and he looked at his watch and then offered that they were probably all at work. Thailand isn't all roses but I don't ever intend returning to The Big Smoke.

[Bkkorupcountry]

Typical Thai narsistic behaviour:

Have hardly an idea, what happens outside their country, but will turn all statistic information upside down and right mirrored to find a way to rank their own country high(er)

Never thought of.. visitors useing AmEx, Visa or.. like 99% of all Europeans: not a credit card but a debit card or simple.. cash.

Compared to all Euopean and US cities: Bangkok is far more poluted, more traffic jam, lower interest of the population in the environment and a far higher level of swindling foreigners.

Seen my experience , visiting Thailand for business since 1978, living in Chonburi for 1993-95, sorry: I hold my opinion.

Before making any criticisms, maybe you should learn to read and comprehend. This was a MASTERCARD WORLDWIDE SURVEY. Where in the report does it say that Thais collected the information?

99% of all Europeans don't use credit card but use debit card or cash? Oh yes, I'm sorry, I didn't realise you meant those staying in Khaosan.

Have you been back to Thailand since 1995?