Myanmar 'No Threat To Thai Tourism'

[Woodcaulk]

I think the smart money is on Burma. I wish I had the opportunity to go over there for a while, I would love to find myself on the ground floor of this whole thing...

Smarter money is on Cambodia now and Burma when a bit more infrastructure is in place.

[ratcatcher]

I would not be so sure if I were the Thai minister o tourism

People will soon see that Burma is interesting, and still in a "natural" condition. This country has not been spoiled yet by the western way of life, and construction have not yet destroyed the landscape.

As soon as infrastructures are better, I bet tourism will significantly shift from Thailand to Burma

IMO, you make several important and interesting points.

Burma, as most westerners and Aung San Suu Kyi still refer to it, is about to be discovered by the outside world. Thailand's success from years ago was based on tourists coming to discover "the mystery and charm" aspect and many were backpackers, who later returned as mature and discriminating tourists (some obviously not so discriminating).

Burma as s & p noted is still 'natural" and it is this aspect that will attract hordes of new tourists willing to accept a few small hardships in exchange for seeing a new and largely unspoiled country with pristine beaches and islands and vast areas of jungle still standing.

As several posters have noted, the English skills of the Burmese far surpass those of their proud and smug "We were never colonized" neighbors.

The "quaintness" that will be seen in Burma will most likely charm visitors and the lack of a Starbucks or a McDonalds (although,no doubt,they are already negotiating) will not be a liability and the more traditional style of dress by men and women will be seen as an attraction, Burmese men, for the most part, still wear the traditional longyi . I can't imagine ASSK in a Gucci pant suit like Yingluck, can you?

Personally, if I was younger and unmarried, I would be beating a path over there as I think that the sleeping tiger is just awakening and will, in a few years, give Thailand a real shock. They may even make their visas more attractive to retirees and others?

Perhaps they can adopt a cute marketing slogan like "Unspoiled Myanmar".

Edited June 25, 2012 by ratcatcher

[ricku]

I would not be so sure if I were the Thai minister o tourism

People will soon see that Burma is interesting, and still in a "natural" condition. This country has not been spoiled yet by the western way of life, and construction have not yet destroyed the landscape.

As soon as infrastructures are better, I bet tourism will significantly shift from Thailand to Burma

IMO, you make several important and interesting points.

Burma, as most westerners and Aung San Suu Kyi still refer to it, is about to be discovered by the outside world. Thailand's success from years ago was based on tourists coming to discover "the mystery and charm" aspect and many were backpackers, who later returned as mature and discriminating tourists (some obviously not so discriminating).

Burma as s & p noted is still 'natural" and it is this aspect that will attract hordes of new tourists willing to accept a few small hardships in exchange for seeing a new and largely unspoiled country with pristine beaches and islands and vast areas of jungle still standing.

As several posters have noted, the English skills of the Burmese far surpass those of their proud and smug "We were never colonized" neighbors.

The "quaintness" that will be seen in Burma will most likely charm visitors and the lack of a Starbucks or a McDonalds (although,no doubt,they are already negotiating) will not be a liability and the more traditional style of dress by men and women will be seen as an attraction, Burmese men, for the most part, still wear the traditional longyi . I can't imagine ASSK in a Gucci pant suit like Yingluck, can you?

Personally, if I was younger and unmarried, I would be beating a path over there as I think that the sleeping tiger is just awakening and will, in a few years, give Thailand a real shock. They may even make their visas more attractive to retirees and others?

Perhaps they can adopt a cute marketing slogan like "Unspoiled Myanmar".

I really hope Myanmar becomes popular, BUT not too popular, or it will eventually end up just like Thailand. Mark my words..

Tourists are good, but hordes of tourists are not good at all, and will quickly turn "unspoiled" into "spoiled"!

Edited June 25, 2012 by ricku

[ratcatcher]

I would not be so sure if I were the Thai minister o tourism

People will soon see that Burma is interesting, and still in a "natural" condition. This country has not been spoiled yet by the western way of life, and construction have not yet destroyed the landscape.

As soon as infrastructures are better, I bet tourism will significantly shift from Thailand to Burma

IMO, you make several important and interesting points.

Burma, as most westerners and Aung San Suu Kyi still refer to it, is about to be discovered by the outside world. Thailand's success from years ago was based on tourists coming to discover "the mystery and charm" aspect and many were backpackers, who later returned as mature and discriminating tourists (some obviously not so discriminating).

Burma as s & p noted is still 'natural" and it is this aspect that will attract hordes of new tourists willing to accept a few small hardships in exchange for seeing a new and largely unspoiled country with pristine beaches and islands and vast areas of jungle still standing.

As several posters have noted, the English skills of the Burmese far surpass those of their proud and smug "We were never colonized" neighbors.

The "quaintness" that will be seen in Burma will most likely charm visitors and the lack of a Starbucks or a McDonalds (although,no doubt,they are already negotiating) will not be a liability and the more traditional style of dress by men and women will be seen as an attraction, Burmese men, for the most part, still wear the traditional longyi . I can't imagine ASSK in a Gucci pant suit like Yingluck, can you?

Personally, if I was younger and unmarried, I would be beating a path over there as I think that the sleeping tiger is just awakening and will, in a few years, give Thailand a real shock. They may even make their visas more attractive to retirees and others?

Perhaps they can adopt a cute marketing slogan like "Unspoiled Myanmar".

I really hope Myanmar becomes popular, BUT not too popular, or it will eventually end up just like Thailand. Mark my words..

Tourists are good, but hordes of tourists are not good at all, and will quickly turn "unspoiled" into "spoiled"!

Very true and good point, by hordes, I meant thousands, not like Thailand with its "millions".

[silsburyhill]

I was in CM where I met with a woman who'd spent the previous month travelling in Burma. She exclaimed (really ...) 'Burma's beautiful! Thailand is like Disneland!

God knows what she thought of her stated next destination, Samui.

And yes ' Also, the hospitality of the local people leaves much to be desired, especially concerning unfair service.'

Having visited Burma myself, all I can say is, <deleted>.

Edited June 25, 2012 by silsburyhill

[Bagwan]

If the US chip in and build roads, schools, hospitals, hotels etc etc Burma (as it is still referred to by the US and the UK amongst others) must realise that there is also a down side. I pray that they keep the US fast food conglomerates, who have played a major part in making obesity so common worldwide, out. The oil companies may not do too many favours to Burma either.

If the country needs a new airport and/or the present major gateway into the country expanded, I think that we can safely assume that they will not enlist help and counsel from Thailand.

[lensta]

"Myanmar is still far behind Thailand in development. Its infrastructure, such as road network, electricity and sanitation, is still poor. Hotel standards are not good. People working in the industry from chef to tour guide lack professionalism. Also, the hospitality of the local people leaves much to be desired, especially concerning unfair service".

It seems Thai people and politicians have yet to understand that putting people down does not elevate themselves, their standards, or their country.

[h90]

No country can realistically hope to surpass Thailand in sex trade expertise. As Myanmar grows its legitimate tourist economy, Thailand will continue to invest and proliferate its sex trade. They are the masters. Thais know how to do this, they are the world's experts in selling sex. So if Schipani can decode the Thai black economy and figure out how much money the Thai sex trade really represents, he can then make projections that really count. It would be very interesting to see the "behind close doors" breakdown of the ADB "internal" discussions to see what they really think.

Well Cambodia, Vietnam, Myanmar aren't that bad in sex trade.

[h90]

"Myanmar is still far behind Thailand in development. Its infrastructure, such as road network, electricity and sanitation, is still poor. Hotel standards are not good. People working in the industry from chef to tour guide lack professionalism. Also, the hospitality of the local people leaves much to be desired, especially concerning unfair service".

It seems Thai people and politicians have yet to understand that putting people down does not elevate themselves, their standards, or their country.

Well I got told a lot Thai chefs work in Myanmar already....So everything a question of time only......

[theblether]

"Myanmar is still far behind Thailand in development. Its infrastructure, such as road network, electricity and sanitation, is still poor. Hotel standards are not good. People working in the industry from chef to tour guide lack professionalism. Also, the hospitality of the local people leaves much to be desired, especially concerning unfair service".

It seems Thai people and politicians have yet to understand that putting people down does not elevate themselves, their standards, or their country.

Well I got told a lot Thai chefs work in Myanmar already....So everything a question of time only......

There's no doubt about that.............it is a question of time, how long it takes to build the infrastructure. It's going to take years.

The question for Thailand is, will they get ready for the competition during those years?, and the answer is no

[zydeco]

I sincerely hope that the various Burmese HR departments treat their Thai personnel well

Indeed, the shoe could soon be on the other foot.

[theblether]

Controversially!!!!!..............I agree for now.................however!!!!.................complacency will undo Thailand.

In the medium to long term Burma will build the infrastructure required to damage Thai tourism, that will take time though. Thailand should be using that time to ensure that they are giving better customer service and a better product to tourists, in preparation for certain competition.

We know that's what they should be doing, we also know there is no chance of Thailand doing that. There will be trouble ahead.

In addition to that, in the short/medium time frame, will be for Burma to offer relatively "raw" nature instead of the commercial holiday destinations that Thailand now offer. Over priced and over rated!

How appealing will that be for tourists? It is after all how Thailand started (American R&R excluded)...........

True.........and a very good point.

Can I just point out that comparing Thailand with Burma is totally wrong. Burma will easily attract a different class of tourist.

Burma is not Thailand, it never has been, and it never will be. It will never have the sleaze image, the Ladyboy cliche, the Thai wife image, and the stench of child exploitation that Thailand has attached to it.

Burma is a totally different proposition, it's reputation as a country is legendary in the collective memory, and the fact that it is a former member of the British empire is a fantastic advantage compared to Thailand. You will easily get ABC demographic tourists to visit Burma with no hesitation as soon as the infrastructure is in place.

I'm already seeing AB category tourists being advertised to in the British press such as The Times, being offered the Burma experience on cruise ships, etc. This country will attract a demographic that Thailand finds hard to attract, and they will attract them easily, as soon as the infrastructure is built.

You will never see a Pattaya in Burma.

[JoeLing]

I sincerely hope that the various Burmese HR departments treat their Thai personnel well

..... yeah, with the same courtesy, friendliness and generosity the Thais treat them here .....

[steelepulse]

Controversially!!!!!..............I agree for now.................however!!!!.................complacency will undo Thailand.

In the medium to long term Burma will build the infrastructure required to damage Thai tourism, that will take time though. Thailand should be using that time to ensure that they are giving better customer service and a better product to tourists, in preparation for certain competition.

We know that's what they should be doing, we also know there is no chance of Thailand doing that. There will be trouble ahead.

In addition to that, in the short/medium time frame, will be for Burma to offer relatively "raw" nature instead of the commercial holiday destinations that Thailand now offer. Over priced and over rated!

How appealing will that be for tourists? It is after all how Thailand started (American R&R excluded)...........

True.........and a very good point.

Can I just point out that comparing Thailand with Burma is totally wrong. Burma will easily attract a different class of tourist.

Burma is not Thailand, it never has been, and it never will be. It will never have the sleaze image, the Ladyboy cliche, the Thai wife image, and the stench of child exploitation that Thailand has attached to it.

Burma is a totally different proposition, it's reputation as a country is legendary in the collective memory, and the fact that it is a former member of the British empire is a fantastic advantage compared to Thailand. You will easily get ABC demographic tourists to visit Burma with no hesitation as soon as the infrastructure is in place.

I'm already seeing AB category tourists being advertised to in the British press such as The Times, being offered the Burma experience on cruise ships, etc. This country will attract a demographic that Thailand finds hard to attract, and they will attract them easily, as soon as the infrastructure is built.

You will never see a Pattaya in Burma.

What exactly is an ABC and AB tourist?

[Payboy]

Also, the hospitality of the local people leaves much to be desired, especially concerning unfair service.

Wooot!

[theblether]

@SteelePulse

ABC is the demographic grouping, A being the richest, B next etc. The marketing I'm seeing just now is aimed at AB tourists, in fact, probably more like A+B+

Burma won't be a package holiday destination for a long while, it will be an ABC destination........most of we Brits read George Orwells Burmese Days at school.......the country has a collective image which is a cut above the average, and it will attract people that would never, and I mean, never, visit Thailand.

Edited June 25, 2012 by theblether

[h90]

"Myanmar is still far behind Thailand in development. Its infrastructure, such as road network, electricity and sanitation, is still poor. Hotel standards are not good. People working in the industry from chef to tour guide lack professionalism. Also, the hospitality of the local people leaves much to be desired, especially concerning unfair service".

It seems Thai people and politicians have yet to understand that putting people down does not elevate themselves, their standards, or their country.

Well I got told a lot Thai chefs work in Myanmar already....So everything a question of time only......

There's no doubt about that.............it is a question of time, how long it takes to build the infrastructure. It's going to take years.

The question for Thailand is, will they get ready for the competition during those years?, and the answer is no

Have nice island or town with beach ready can be done in 1 year. Of course just for beach holidays, but to be honest most of the tourists just book Pattaya/Phuket/Koh Samui and stay there on the beach. If an airport is close and the street to the resort is OK it will be good enough.

Egypt or Cuba isn't doing it different.

Of course they won't take over 90 % of the tourists, but a few %. Maybe it will only bring the tourism to a stable level without increase in Thailand.

If the economic crises getting worse and Myanmar offers super low prices than maybe Thailand has to reduce prices as well....not getting less tourists but less profit.

[brit1984]

Controversially!!!!!..............I agree for now.................however!!!!.................complacency will undo Thailand.

In the medium to long term Burma will build the infrastructure required to damage Thai tourism, that will take time though. Thailand should be using that time to ensure that they are giving better customer service and a better product to tourists, in preparation for certain competition.

We know that's what they should be doing, we also know there is no chance of Thailand doing that. There will be trouble ahead.

In addition to that, in the short/medium time frame, will be for Burma to offer relatively "raw" nature instead of the commercial holiday destinations that Thailand now offer. Over priced and over rated!

How appealing will that be for tourists? It is after all how Thailand started (American R&R excluded)...........

True.........and a very good point.

Can I just point out that comparing Thailand with Burma is totally wrong. Burma will easily attract a different class of tourist.

Burma is not Thailand, it never has been, and it never will be. It will never have the sleaze image, the Ladyboy cliche, the Thai wife image, and the stench of child exploitation that Thailand has attached to it.

Burma is a totally different proposition, it's reputation as a country is legendary in the collective memory, and the fact that it is a former member of the British empire is a fantastic advantage compared to Thailand. You will easily get ABC demographic tourists to visit Burma with no hesitation as soon as the infrastructure is in place.

I'm already seeing AB category tourists being advertised to in the British press such as The Times, being offered the Burma experience on cruise ships, etc. This country will attract a demographic that Thailand finds hard to attract, and they will attract them easily, as soon as the infrastructure is built.

You will never see a Pattaya in Burma.

I know what you mean that Burma has a good chance of attracting nice educated people who like a bit of history, but Thailand does that too.

Given the abundance of cheap flights (and cheap everything else here) Thailand obviously attracts a lot of low-class tourists, however it is also well established as a destination for higher-class holidaymakers too.

I doubt all the +$500 per night hotels and spa resorts in Thailand are filled with blue-collar workers on sex tourism trips.

Sent from iPhone; please forgive any typos or violations of forum rules

[doggie888888]

Me thinks the word "yet" is missing from the end of the headline.

[theblether]

Controversially!!!!!..............I agree for now.................however!!!!.................complacency will undo Thailand.

In the medium to long term Burma will build the infrastructure required to damage Thai tourism, that will take time though. Thailand should be using that time to ensure that they are giving better customer service and a better product to tourists, in preparation for certain competition.

We know that's what they should be doing, we also know there is no chance of Thailand doing that. There will be trouble ahead.

In addition to that, in the short/medium time frame, will be for Burma to offer relatively "raw" nature instead of the commercial holiday destinations that Thailand now offer. Over priced and over rated!

How appealing will that be for tourists? It is after all how Thailand started (American R&R excluded)...........

True.........and a very good point.

Can I just point out that comparing Thailand with Burma is totally wrong. Burma will easily attract a different class of tourist.

Burma is not Thailand, it never has been, and it never will be. It will never have the sleaze image, the Ladyboy cliche, the Thai wife image, and the stench of child exploitation that Thailand has attached to it.

Burma is a totally different proposition, it's reputation as a country is legendary in the collective memory, and the fact that it is a former member of the British empire is a fantastic advantage compared to Thailand. You will easily get ABC demographic tourists to visit Burma with no hesitation as soon as the infrastructure is in place.

I'm already seeing AB category tourists being advertised to in the British press such as The Times, being offered the Burma experience on cruise ships, etc. This country will attract a demographic that Thailand finds hard to attract, and they will attract them easily, as soon as the infrastructure is built.

You will never see a Pattaya in Burma.

I know what you mean that Burma has a good chance of attracting nice educated people who like a bit of history, but Thailand does that too.

Given the abundance of cheap flights (and cheap everything else here) Thailand obviously attracts a lot of low-class tourists, however it is also well established as a destination for higher-class holidaymakers too.

I doubt all the +$500 per night hotels and spa resorts in Thailand are filled with blue-collar workers on sex tourism trips.

Sent from iPhone; please forgive any typos or violations of forum rules

You know that there are plenty of people who would never visit Thailand due to it's reputation.

That doesn't apply to Burma, and it never will, as the Burmese will not allow a Pattaya.

[JoeLing]

Thirty years back, no one in Thailand thought Vietnam, Cambodia or Laos would ever be a serious competition to Thailand's tourism. Today, for many back-packers, Thailand is only gateway for them. Fewer and fewer people are staying.

Apart as from the statistical use, what use is it to have tourists just transiting the "Hub"?

I belive Myanmar's infrastructure isn't too much of a problem as back-packers and travelers don't care on their quest to find new, unspoiled places and where ever back-packers go, a few years later the place is booming with holiday makers.

What took Thailand 35 years to develop (and 10 years to milk and destroy), Laos, Cambodia and Vietnam took half the time. As some one mentioned before, apart from Thais, the rest of SEA is willing to learn from others. So I recon, Myanmar will overtake Thailand in just a few years, if politics don't change back to the worse and once fully opened to the individual tourist.

On the positive side, it's not all bleak, there is a silver lining on the horizon for Thais. In a few years time, a few million "highly skilled" Thais will find employment in Myanmar's fishing, building and tourist industries, scrubbing boats, building roads, sweeping leaves, living in shanty towns called "Ban Thai" and wonder why "No have good luck"

[DLock]

Controversially!!!!!..............I agree for now.................however!!!!.................complacency will undo Thailand.

In the medium to long term Burma will build the infrastructure required to damage Thai tourism, that will take time though. Thailand should be using that time to ensure that they are giving better customer service and a better product to tourists, in preparation for certain competition.

We know that's what they should be doing, we also know there is no chance of Thailand doing that. There will be trouble ahead.

In addition to that, in the short/medium time frame, will be for Burma to offer relatively "raw" nature instead of the commercial holiday destinations that Thailand now offer. Over priced and over rated!

How appealing will that be for tourists? It is after all how Thailand started (American R&R excluded)...........

True.........and a very good point.

Can I just point out that comparing Thailand with Burma is totally wrong. Burma will easily attract a different class of tourist.

Burma is not Thailand, it never has been, and it never will be. It will never have the sleaze image, the Ladyboy cliche, the Thai wife image, and the stench of child exploitation that Thailand has attached to it.

Burma is a totally different proposition, it's reputation as a country is legendary in the collective memory, and the fact that it is a former member of the British empire is a fantastic advantage compared to Thailand. You will easily get ABC demographic tourists to visit Burma with no hesitation as soon as the infrastructure is in place.

I'm already seeing AB category tourists being advertised to in the British press such as The Times, being offered the Burma experience on cruise ships, etc. This country will attract a demographic that Thailand finds hard to attract, and they will attract them easily, as soon as the infrastructure is built.

You will never see a Pattaya in Burma.

I agree Blether.

Whilst Thailand will always have a place for the sex-tourists, Burma will quickly bite into the tourists that want culture, temples, truly world class beaches, diving and unspoiled nature. What % that is of the total tourists to Thailand I have no idea, but it is significant enough to hurt Thailand's tourist market quicker than they can react.

It's not a single country that will take Thailand's mantle as the tourist destination of Asia....it is the combined countries of SEA that will slowly eat away at Thailand's tourism, and I'm not sure there is much Thailand can do. It's best days are behind it. The other countries have their best days ahead.

Edited June 25, 2012 by DLock

[renaissanc]

Controversially!!!!!..............I agree for now.................however!!!!.................complacency will undo Thailand.

In the medium to long term Burma will build the infrastructure required to damage Thai tourism, that will take time though. Thailand should be using that time to ensure that they are giving better customer service and a better product to tourists, in preparation for certain competition.

We know that's what they should be doing, we also know there is no chance of Thailand doing that. There will be trouble ahead.

I can see it happening too. Thailand will carry on, business as usual, scamming tourists, ruining the environment, etc., with no preparation for competition from Myanmar - "Don't you know who we are? attitude. One day, maybe in 5 years when Myanmar has got its act together, the Thai authorities will be scratching their heads and wondering where the tourists have gone.

[edwinclapham]

And I nominate Singapore as the hub thus avoiding Swampy, thus avoiding Thai A.......

[Scorpio1949]

Infrastructure- agreed it will take time.

Professionalism? Do me a favour.

Murders, hotel fires, scams, ruined beaches, polution, rubbish, riots, floods, lawlessness etc. Will also play their part.

Agree 100%

[hansnl]

Why don't we say as it is?

Birma has experience dealing with westerners, due to it's colonial past.

Thailand has not.

Which means Birma is more flexible in coping with foreigners.

It is just waiting fir the first western company seeing the possibities of Birma to invest, and there it goes.

And I am afraid this will not take a long time.

Also not very certain if there will never be a kind of gambling/sex thing somewhere in Birma.

Edited June 25, 2012 by hansnl

[brit1984]

True.........and a very good point.

Can I just point out that comparing Thailand with Burma is totally wrong. Burma will easily attract a different class of tourist.

Burma is not Thailand, it never has been, and it never will be. It will never have the sleaze image, the Ladyboy cliche, the Thai wife image, and the stench of child exploitation that Thailand has attached to it.

Burma is a totally different proposition, it's reputation as a country is legendary in the collective memory, and the fact that it is a former member of the British empire is a fantastic advantage compared to Thailand. You will easily get ABC demographic tourists to visit Burma with no hesitation as soon as the infrastructure is in place.

I'm already seeing AB category tourists being advertised to in the British press such as The Times, being offered the Burma experience on cruise ships, etc. This country will attract a demographic that Thailand finds hard to attract, and they will attract them easily, as soon as the infrastructure is built.

You will never see a Pattaya in Burma.

I know what you mean that Burma has a good chance of attracting nice educated people who like a bit of history, but Thailand does that too.

Given the abundance of cheap flights (and cheap everything else here) Thailand obviously attracts a lot of low-class tourists, however it is also well established as a destination for higher-class holidaymakers too.

I doubt all the +$500 per night hotels and spa resorts in Thailand are filled with blue-collar workers on sex tourism trips.

Sent from iPhone; please forgive any typos or violations of forum rules

You know that there are plenty of people who would never visit Thailand due to it's reputation.

That doesn't apply to Burma, and it never will, as the Burmese will not allow a Pattaya.

I know exactly what you mean that many people think of Thailand as a sleazy country. However, in my opinion, of people who have not visited Thailand it is generally lower-class people who have heard about Pattaya (from their mate from down the pub) where as the higher-class people (that you are talking about) may have read that they used to have ping-pong sex shows in Bangkok but will not know (or care) if they still exist.

Prudish lower-class people might be afraid to visit Thai (because they don't want everyone to think they are the same as that sex tourist bloke from down the pub) but Thailand is still extremely popular with lower-class tourists despite (and to some extent because of) the sleaze.

On the other hand, I have rarely heard higher-class people describe Thailand as anything other than a sunny beach holiday destination with a great choice of accommodation, restaurants, beautiful scenery, etc.

Thailand's sex industry is of course an issue for the country, but I don't think it is any more in potential tourists' minds than the abuses of human-rights, violent conflict and starvation that plagues Burma. Also, I am not sure Burma will find it any easier to solve these problems than Thailand has with dealing with the problem of a highly visible sex industry.

Edited June 25, 2012 by brit1984

[TinoThailand]

Not now, we all know that.

Now they want to have a lot of investments and sell land like crazy. One day someone will stand up saying: we lose to much land to the Farang, it should stop.

give it 50 years

[Reasonableman]

Me thinks the word "yet" is missing from the end of the headline.

Methinks that was an intentional double-entendre!

[mrtoad]

Expect plenty of complacency from Thailand. Burma will catch up Thailand quite quickly, particularly if the current in-looking clowns are still running the country in 5 years time.