Backpackers Are Great Asset For Chiang Mai

[femi fan]

I have nothing against backpackers, but I must agree. For at least the last few decades - and I suspect long before - the vast majority of them have been following the Lonely Planet tour like lemmings and doing little "exploring" on their own. I don't really blame them, but - in general - the idea of the adventuresome backpacker is simply a myth.

But on what basis can you possibly claim that the 'vast majority' of them follow the lonely planet book? And how do you know what exploring they are doing? Do you follow them all day long?

I remember when i came backpacking over here back in 1991. I had my lonely planet yellow book. I'd been reading it in england and getting infused with excitement about finding such cheap and exotic places in a tropical paradise. When i got here i used the book for maps and nothing else. We used to meet lots of fellow travelers and there was a split between guide book followers, and the 'real' travelers who didn't use them. For me, travel is fun, exciting, adventurous, regardless of whether one looks in a book or not. What's so wrong with looking in a guide book and learning through what others have done? Equally, it's great to not look and to feel you are more foraging your own path.

You might like to be reminded that the lonely planet books have not been going for the last few decades, unless you mean two or three.

Has it occurred to you that the people you see in chiang mai looking in their books may spend time on their travels NOT looking in their books?

I really do have problems understanding why so many people look down on travelers and backpackers, especially if they have a guide book. Bloody hell, tourists don't even know where they're going half the time and didn't choose, the package tour did all that for them.

As it happens, the last laugh rests with the backpackers because they're all having a great magical time. And they're completely free of responsibilities that daily life and dealing with the demands of society exert on the rest of us. Kudos to them, and i'm well glad i live in chiang mai, one of the positives of doing so is meeting these people and hearing their stories, and swapping them for some of mine when i did my travels over here before the money ran out.

[uptheos]

what are you talking about?

backpackers "discover" places? what? backpackers go on the backpackers' tour as suggested by the guidebooks. ill grant you that decades ago backpackers found chiang mai, found pai, etc because they found the access to drugs "cool,. but that era where true exploration took place is LONG GONE, my friend.

I have nothing against backpackers, but I must agree. For at least the last few decades - and I suspect long before - the vast majority of them have been following the Lonely Planet tour like lemmings and doing little "exploring" on their own. I don't really blame them, but - in general - the idea of the adventuresome backpacker is simply a myth.

But you need some basics, travel info, lodgings. sights you might miss etc, no one except all the ex special forces based in Chiang Mai can really explore everywhere cold turkey. Doesn't mean you can't go off and explore places that are not in Lonely Planet.

[femi fan]

i like the rucksack people. they have a clue and generally respect the places they go.

the group im referring to is what you label as "tourists". maybe this is what cmsally calls "flashpackers", not sure. pai is full of them now. vang vieng is 100% directed at them. they are blind hedonists in search of wreckless, lawless "fun".

im hardly against drugs, and have tried a fair many. but some kinds of people dont understand what drugs are for. these tourists/flashpackers have no idea.

Well, perhaps our views are merging! I've been talking about rucksack people, because rucksacks mean backpackers to me. I see two kinds of foreign people in thailand: what i call the suitcase brigade and the backpackers. I'm not a keen fan of the former because of the lack of respect i see them affording others on their travels and the locals. They're in their group and to hell with everyone else. Clearly this is not all of them, but i'm generalising, and happy to be guilty of that. As it happens the ones i see are far more interested in getting blind drunk, and perhaps could do with a few joints to calm them down.

I've seen the young two-weekers, the suitcase brigade in some of my favourite places in thailand, and yes, for me it has ruined them somewhat. But when it comes to backpackers, the subject of this thread, then i'm well in favour of them. They are travelers, even if they might be communicating back home half the time in those net cafes. For me it was a monthly visit to post restante, always too late for anything.

It's my understanding also that most backpackers are on a tight budget because they're away for months, where as the suitcasers are only away for two weeks so blow loads of money on booze and higher end hotels rather than guest houses. So the ones blowing all the money on their 'hedonism' are the tourists.

[samsara]

tend to get around a fair bit and dont ever see any of them off the regular tour routes. most of them never leave the city square or night bazaar area. some venture as far as doi suthep or mae rim, but thats it, folks. they all go to the same nightspots, buy the same stuff, and tell you the same stories. theyre just a bunch of sheep meandering through the same streets, eating the same food, one week after another. hardly any distinguishing characteristics between the groups one week to the next.

the truly sad thing is that half the time theyre in chiang mai theyre planning their next destination

[samsara]

i like the rucksack people. they have a clue and generally respect the places they go.

the group im referring to is what you label as "tourists". maybe this is what cmsally calls "flashpackers", not sure. pai is full of them now. vang vieng is 100% directed at them. they are blind hedonists in search of wreckless, lawless "fun".

im hardly against drugs, and have tried a fair many. but some kinds of people dont understand what drugs are for. these tourists/flashpackers have no idea.

Well, perhaps our views are merging! I've been talking about rucksack people, because rucksacks mean backpackers to me. I see two kinds of foreign people in thailand: what i call the suitcase brigade and the backpackers. I'm not a keen fan of the former because of the lack of respect i see them affording others on their travels and the locals. They're in their group and to hell with everyone else. Clearly this is not all of them, but i'm generalising, and happy to be guilty of that. As it happens the ones i see are far more interested in getting blind drunk, and perhaps could do with a few joints to calm them down.

I've seen the young two-weekers, the suitcase brigade in some of my favourite places in thailand, and yes, for me it has ruined them somewhat. But when it comes to backpackers, the subject of this thread, then i'm well in favour of them. They are travelers, even if they might be communicating back home half the time in those net cafes. For me it was a monthly visit to post restante, always too late for anything.

It's my understanding also that most backpackers are on a tight budget because they're away for months, where as the suitcasers are only away for two weeks so blow loads of money on booze and higher end hotels rather than guest houses. So the ones blowing all the money on their 'hedonism' are the tourists.

yes, i think we equally despise the suitcase brigade. from my experience in thailand, though, the true backpackers (rucksackers) are few and far between these days. the suitcase brigade stays longer than you think, maybe. ive talked to some that have been going for 2-3 months through cambodia, thailand, laos...and they most definitely fit in the suitcase category according to their habits, clothes, and attitudes.

so afterall, i think we pretty much agree, just different terminology.

[beb]

I backpack all the time and I don't fit any of the descriptions of a backpacker that have been given here so far. I don't really trust Lonely Planet but it's not because I'm more advanced than the other backpackers, but because the information strikes me as dated and likely wrong. But I'll be sure that if I do end up with a Lonely Planet in Chiang Mai that I'll put a fake cover on it to avoid the wrath of the local expats.

In any case, believe it or not, there is a lot of fun in backpacking and staying at cheap places and cheap cafes. I guess if you've never done it then you wouldn't understand and honestly, I didn't understand until I was in my 40s. Traveling for me to other countries now is a lot more fun and a lot less nerve wracking than when I was traveling the other way.

[philw]

They just annoy me.

The women wandering around with no bra and a copy of 'lost planet' in their hands.

The shirtless guys just wearing swimming shorts.

The whole lot of them hiring m/cs while clearly never even sat on one before, let alone having a license.

(Although to be fair, the Chinese tourist are now doing the m/c madness thing but at least wearing t-shirts)

OK, so they spend money, but they sure bring down the tone of the place.

How awfully frightful, that they bring down the tone of the place.........

You should have them admonished and perhaps even berated.

How dare such people travel at will........

Apart from traveling at will, how did you get here and please do tell how your presence raises the tone.

[weary]

I don't really trust Lonely Planet but it's not because I'm more advanced than the other backpackers, but because the information strikes me as dated and likely wrong.

I think you're right. Lonely Planet has wrestled with quality issues since Cummings left. It was reliable when he was still running the show. Tough to fill those shoes.

[hellodolly]

They just annoy me.

The women wandering around with no bra and a copy of 'lost planet' in their hands.

The shirtless guys just wearing swimming shorts.

The whole lot of them hiring m/cs while clearly never even sat on one before, let alone having a license.

(Although to be fair, the Chinese tourist are now doing the m/c madness thing but at least wearing t-shirts)

OK, so they spend money, but they sure bring down the tone of the place.

How awfully frightful, that they bring down the tone of the place.........

You should have them admonished and perhaps even berated.

How dare such people travel at will........

Apart from traveling at will, how did you get here and please do tell how your presence raises the tone.

I have to agree with you on this one phil.

I do hope he answers it.

[WinnieTheKhwai]

The OP wrote:

The reality is that backpackers make a substantial contribution to Chiang Mai’s local tourism and probably spend more per capita than do five-star travelers, because they stay longer and don’t book into foreign-owned hotels.

The statement in bold is almost certainly false. I see no evidence for this nor does it strike me as intuitively plausible.

Two things:

1. You got to take length of stay into account.. Backpackers often stay for months in country. A 5 star traveler is typically gone in a week.

2. Given the context of the second part of the bold text, I'd say the 'per capita' here refers to the local (in this case Thai) population. A relatively large part of what backpackers spend ends up in the hands of locals. A relatively large part of what a 5 star traveler spends ends up on the balance sheet of Starwood or Intercontinental.

As far as any certain class of traveler being more "clueless" than others, all I can say is that nearly all travelers (unless they have been in a place repeatedly) are equally uninitiated.

Yes, I would agree with that. However, backpackers do have the stigma to think they know it all, so you notice it more.

[Ulysses G.]

But on what basis can you possibly claim that the 'vast majority' of them follow the lonely planet book? And how do you know what exploring they are doing? Do you follow them all day long?

When I first came here in the late 80s I traveled all over Thailand (and the rest of SEA) for a number of years. I used local transportation when I could (it was a lot cheaper than the minivans or Kao San buses that most of the backpackers used and much more comfortable). I would virtually never see any backpackers on local buses and few foreigners of any kind. When I went to a town that was not popular with backpackers, I would not see them there either.

I am not any great explorer, but I was astounded at how unadventuresome the backpackers were and how they wasted money to travel with the crowd, rather than figure things out on their own.

To give Joe Cummings credit, he had public busses in the LP and plenty of small towns that were not on the Lonely Planet trail, but I would almost never see other foreigners in these places and the ones that I did see seemed to be mostly middle aged travelers that were not carrying backpacks. As I said before, I have nothing against backpackers, but - in general - adventure travelers they are not.

Edited July 26, 2012 by Ulysses G.

[femi fan]

yes, i think we equally despise the suitcase brigade. from my experience in thailand, though, the true backpackers (rucksackers) are few and far between these days. the suitcase brigade stays longer than you think, maybe. ive talked to some that have been going for 2-3 months through cambodia, thailand, laos...and they most definitely fit in the suitcase category according to their habits, clothes, and attitudes.

so afterall, i think we pretty much agree, just different terminology.

Well, i'd never despise anyone, more like feel sorry for them. Society back in my country is distinctly different to 20, 30 years ago, and i've taken into account that i now look through older eyes. What you see over here no doubt reflects how things are back home. I see a bit of a broken place back in my homeland.

Backpackers however seem to glide through different generations doing much the same thing having much the same attitudes, based on adventure. Nowadays that will clearly mean going into the internet cafs to write home to their friends stuck at home about their experiences. But there again i saw lots of people watching old british comedies or american movies in samui and other places 20 years ago and could not understand such a dreadful waste of time!

[femi fan]

But on what basis can you possibly claim that the 'vast majority' of them follow the lonely planet book? And how do you know what exploring they are doing? Do you follow them all day long?

When I first came here in the late 80s I traveled all over Thailand (and the rest of SEA) for a number of years. I used local transportation when I could (it was a lot cheaper than the minivans or Kao San buses that most of the backpackers used and much more comfortable). I would virtually never see any backpackers on local buses and few foreigners of any kind. When I went to a town that was not popular with backpackers, I would not see them there either.

I am not any great explorer, but I was astounded at how unadventuresome the backpackers were and how they wasted money to travel with the crowd, rather than figure things out on their own.

To give Joe Cummings credit, he had public busses in the LP and plenty of small towns that were not on the Lonely Planet trail, but I would almost never see other foreigners in these places and the ones that I did see seemed to be mostly middle aged travelers that were not carrying backpacks. As I said before, I have nothing against backpackers, but - in general - adventure travelers they are not.

Fair dos! But looking at your answer, would you have enjoyed your traveling so much if loads of them had been on the local transport and going to the outoftheway places you went to?!

I think it takes a certain kind of person to go off the beaten track, to do it without much prior guidance. Such a person will always be in a minority, and that's good news for those who like to go to different places. They have more spunk, but i'm not sure you can say they have less sense of adventure. The adventure one experiences is most definitely subjective and relative to one's previous experiences in life. I think that's unfair to call backpackers who appear to follow the typical guide book route unadventurous.

And again, it's only your perception that they wasted money to be with a crowd. Perhaps they were having a fine time, mixing with new friends away from the big bad society at home and all it's freedom curtailments.

Backpackers have in essence left the security of their homeland and society for a long time. For many this is adventurous just to start off with and perhaps they like to avoid rushing into the deep end.

The middle aged ones you saw in the rarely visited places are no doubt old hands at traveling. Perhaps i'm one of them that could be seen now, because i've been to nearly half the provinces in thailand and even if i go for a day or two i act like a traveler and backpacker. I love provincial thailand, but in my actual real traveling days such places were not on my radar. And i'm definitely an adventurous person when it comes to travel. But i also like the easy life too!

[Ulysses G.]

I agree with you that they had left home and that they were seeing new places and having fun and there is nothing wrong with that. I was just surprised that all the stuff that I had read about exploring new and unusual destinations was mostly limited to a few travelers in the Joe Cummings model. I guess that it helps when you are getting paid pretty well for doing it.

Edited July 26, 2012 by Ulysses G.

[samsara]

But on what basis can you possibly claim that the 'vast majority' of them follow the lonely planet book? And how do you know what exploring they are doing? Do you follow them all day long?

When I first came here in the late 80s I traveled all over Thailand (and the rest of SEA) for a number of years. I used local transportation when I could (it was a lot cheaper than the minivans or Kao San buses that most of the backpackers used and much more comfortable). I would virtually never see any backpackers on local buses and few foreigners of any kind. When I went to a town that was not popular with backpackers, I would not see them there either.

I am not any great explorer, but I was astounded at how unadventuresome the backpackers were and how they wasted money to travel with the crowd, rather than figure things out on their own.

To give Joe Cummings credit, he had public busses in the LP and plenty of small towns that were not on the Lonely Planet trail, but I would almost never see other foreigners in these places and the ones that I did see seemed to be mostly middle aged travelers that were not carrying backpacks. As I said before, I have nothing against backpackers, but - in general - adventure travelers they are not.

Fair dos! But looking at your answer, would you have enjoyed your traveling so much if loads of them had been on the local transport and going to the outoftheway places you went to?!

I think it takes a certain kind of person to go off the beaten track, to do it without much prior guidance. Such a person will always be in a minority, and that's good news for those who like to go to different places. They have more spunk, but i'm not sure you can say they have less sense of adventure. The adventure one experiences is most definitely subjective and relative to one's previous experiences in life. I think that's unfair to call backpackers who appear to follow the typical guide book route unadventurous.

And again, it's only your perception that they wasted money to be with a crowd. Perhaps they were having a fine time, mixing with new friends away from the big bad society at home and all it's freedom curtailments.

Backpackers have in essence left the security of their homeland and society for a long time. For many this is adventurous just to start off with and perhaps they like to avoid rushing into the deep end.

The middle aged ones you saw in the rarely visited places are no doubt old hands at traveling. Perhaps i'm one of them that could be seen now, because i've been to nearly half the provinces in thailand and even if i go for a day or two i act like a traveler and backpacker. I love provincial thailand, but in my actual real traveling days such places were not on my radar. And i'm definitely an adventurous person when it comes to travel. But i also like the easy life too!

i think youre very much romanticizing backpacker culture from 2000 on. adventurous by just getting on a plane? o, come on lol. in this age there is nothing unexpected for the traveler. all the info is already available, so if youre going to the mainstay places only, its basically a matter of stamping your ticket, taking the same photo as everyone else, buying the tshirt, and going to the next place. i dont see the adventure in that at all.

take chiang mai, for example. you can watch videos online detailing almost every tourist destination that these "intrepid" souls will go to. you can read detailed blogs about every facet of the journey. in this day and age there are no surprises, there is no adventure unless you create it and get off the beaten path, which as ulysses explains, just doesnt happen with these people. theyd rather spend a few hours at starbucks in the morning than rent a bike and go explore off the tourist map.

im like you; ive been to about 75% of thailand. only lived in chiang mai 3 months but ive already been to more places than almost everyone ive talked to simply because i go out and explore. but youre very right, i would enjoy it far less if i saw dozens of suitcase travelers when i went to mae taeng, luang nuea or did the somoeng loop.

Edited July 26, 2012 by samsara

[cmsally]

I remember taking a bicycle Chiang Saen to Golden Triangle before the road was paved. Probably a good reason I was the only one at the time. It was rainy season and after first 50m had to get off and push! Knee deep in mud! Got to the Golden Triangle and saw coffin floating down from Burma on a little raft. Got caught in one of those circular currents and spent the next half an hour going in circles (the coffin that is, not me!) Had a little contemplation on the issue of taking a long river journey when already deceased.

[Johpa]

Backpackers are good for Chiang Mai, if only because in later-life they return, with spouses & families, and go up-market.

And in the meantime the local families that catered to the backpackers reinvested their profits over time to attract incrementally upscale tourists. It is ironic that there is so much animus against today's backpackers from certain Chiang Mai ex-pats, especially those who never ventured out onto the "gringo trail", people who now reside in the ex-pat friendly town whose tourist/ex-pat infrastructure was built upon the backpackers. It was only some 30 years ago that the only tourist trade worth mentioning up north were backpackers. The only other farangs were a handful of old school missionaries and the tobacco folks who were the core of the local Hash House Harriers. Well known establishments that once depended upon backpackers include Daret's. Duke's, and the Riverside. A little further afield, Pai would not exist as it does today without having "been found" by the backpacker crowd. If anything, Chiang Mai should be building a statue to Tony Wheeler and Joe Cummings.

[Semper]

Pai would not exist as it does today without having "been found" by the backpacker crowd

Correct, unfortunately we can't turn the time counterclockwise.

[elektrified]

Wouldn't it be great if a bunch of backpackers were on here to defend themselves?

I think a lot of ex and current backpackers might already have voiced an opinion.

When I visit my Lisu friends at Doi Lan, Wawee.......I take a backpack.

What is there to defend, they're too busy having a GREAT time than writing on here.

Do we have intelligent satnav backpackers yet as opposed to ignorant Lonely Planet people?

I backpacked (and hitchhiked - back when it was safe to do so) 1/2 way across Canada in the late 70's, around Europe a couple of times in the 70's and 80's. In the last 10 years living in Europe and Thailand, unless I'm going away for a few weeks, I always travel with a backpack.

And Lonely Planet books are great. Traveling around the world opened my eyes up to a lot of things I would have not else learned.

[weary]

Pai would not exist as it does today without having "been found" by the backpacker crowd

Correct, unfortunately we can't turn the time counterclockwise.

Lucky then, that we can still choose to go to Phrao, Chiang Dao, Nan, Mae Sariang and many other places in the North that have not been touristified in the same way as Pai. For some reason though, many people still seem to choose Pai. I wonder why that is? Maybe the basic infrastructure of accommodation and slightly Westernized Thai food that was created to cater to backpackers is rather convenient even to some of those who complain about it?

Edited July 26, 2012 by weary

[mcgriffith]

OK, I've hit a few "like' buttons, but now I'll make my confession.

I am (or was) a backpacker.

As in, I left home in Sunnyvale, California in 1970...and backpacked around the world.

Went by car from No. California to and thru Mexico with friends- all long-haired youths. Yup, you could call us "backpackers".

Got a job on a tanker working as deck crewman, from Veracruz, Mexico to Rotterdam, Nederlands. Met a German guy working on the ship.

Rode the train to Germany, and stayed with his family for a month or so in Mettman, near Dusseldorf.

Then (gasp!) hitchhiked to Koln, where I went to a big international motorcycle exhibition.

Met some Austrians who invited me to their factory in Mattighofen (near Salzburg) where they produced a new motorcycle- a KTM motocross 125cc.

Bought it, and rode from Austria, down the coast of Yugoslavia, into northern Greece...and then thru Turkey, Iran and Afghanistan.

I had a "backpack" on the whole time during this journey by car, ship, train and motorcycle.

Oh, I forgot to mention that when I left home in 1970, my total cash assets were $1400 US. That is not a typo.

Ran out of money in Kabul, but that is another story, and just part of the backpacker experience.

When I first visited Chiang Mai in 1975, I was a backpacker.

I rode the train up from Bangkok, and stayed in a small hotel near the train station.

It was Songkran week, and it was just as crazy then as it is now.

I signed up for a tour to the Golden Triangle. Minibus to Fang and Thaton, then a longtail boat down the Mae Kok. Got off the boat and hiked thru various villages, when the opium eradication operations by the Thai military were in full swing. Several times encountered full camo/face paint/twigs in the helmet bands troops armed to the teeth on these trails. Visited Lisu, Lahu, Karen, Shan, KMT Yunnanese and misc. other ethnic villages. Slept in huts in the villages. I was a backpacker.

OK, now I am a comfortably retired farang, with millions in the bank.

But I can say one thing with pride.

I was a backpacker!

[Mapguy]

OK, I'm not the one that's going to be winning any beauty competitions, but I have to say it. The bra-less woman that I've seen trouncing around Chiang Mai are the ones that you wish were covered up! Murphy's law I guess....

Maybe best to define what you mean by backpacker first.

Sheep with guidebook moving every 6 hours?

Girl spending 30K GBP but had a backpack with her?

Freeloader taking advantage of free food/drink specials

Young bloke who can afford mid-range when on vacation but chooses to stay in guesthouses to meet new people.

Shirtless foreigners driving m/c's (guess they had backpacker tan)

Seems like a very wide range of people. Who are we talking about?

You forgot the braless women.

+1

[uptheos]

Some really great stories coming from some great people (a few that I know personally).

I think its getting to the point that we can say with some certainty, that backpackers in general, are a benefit to wherever they go and they certainly learn a lot on their travels.

[samsara]

OK, I've hit a few "like' buttons, but now I'll make my confession.

I am (or was) a backpacker.

As in, I left home in Sunnyvale, California in 1970...and backpacked around the world.

Went by car from No. California to and thru Mexico with friends- all long-haired youths. Yup, you could call us "backpackers".

Got a job on a tanker working as deck crewman, from Veracruz, Mexico to Rotterdam, Nederlands. Met a German guy working on the ship.

Rode the train to Germany, and stayed with his family for a month or so in Mettman, near Dusseldorf.

Then (gasp!) hitchhiked to Koln, where I went to a big international motorcycle exhibition.

Met some Austrians who invited me to their factory in Mattighofen (near Salzburg) where they produced a new motorcycle- a KTM motocross 125cc.

Bought it, and rode from Austria, down the coast of Yugoslavia, into northern Greece...and then thru Turkey, Iran and Afghanistan.

I had a "backpack" on the whole time during this journey by car, ship, train and motorcycle.

Oh, I forgot to mention that when I left home in 1970, my total cash assets were $1400 US. That is not a typo.

Ran out of money in Kabul, but that is another story, and just part of the backpacker experience.

When I first visited Chiang Mai in 1975, I was a backpacker.

I rode the train up from Bangkok, and stayed in a small hotel near the train station.

It was Songkran week, and it was just as crazy then as it is now.

I signed up for a tour to the Golden Triangle. Minibus to Fang and Thaton, then a longtail boat down the Mae Kok. Got off the boat and hiked thru various villages, when the opium eradication operations by the Thai military were in full swing. Several times encountered full camo/face paint/twigs in the helmet bands troops armed to the teeth on these trails. Visited Lisu, Lahu, Karen, Shan, KMT Yunnanese and misc. other ethnic villages. Slept in huts in the villages. I was a backpacker.

OK, now I am a comfortably retired farang, with millions in the bank.

But I can say one thing with pride.

I was a backpacker!

now THAT is awesome.

[daoyai]

Some really great stories coming from some great people (a few that I know personally).

I think its getting to the point that we can say with some certainty, that backpackers in general, are a benefit to wherever they go and they certainly learn a lot on their travels.

Maybe in general but I have a feeling that mcgriffith's debaucherie in Kabul is probably what inspired the formation of the Taliban.

[uptheos]

Some really great stories coming from some great people (a few that I know personally).

I think its getting to the point that we can say with some certainty, that backpackers in general, are a benefit to wherever they go and they certainly learn a lot on their travels.

Maybe in general but I have a feeling that mcgriffith's debaucherie in Kabul is probably what inspired the formation of the Taliban.

Hmm, food for thought he's certainly kept that quiet......just how does a backpacker survive without money in Kabul?

[mcgriffith]

Top Secret. I'd have to kill you, if I told you....

[hml367]

Top Secret. I'd have to kill you, if I told you....

Any special reason, other than adventure, and that you could post, for leaving Northern California?

MSPain

[WinnieTheKhwai]

I don't really trust Lonely Planet but it's not because I'm more advanced than the other backpackers, but because the information strikes me as dated and likely wrong.

I think you're right. Lonely Planet has wrestled with quality issues since Cummings left. It was reliable when he was still running the show. Tough to fill those shoes.

Yes. To me, Joe Cummigns is the Thailand Edition, back when it was respectfully referenced and capitalized as "The Book". Without him it's just a another book; as empty as a bible without Jesus. Ironically they share the same initials.

He IS still around though. To Real Travellers, he'll always be.

Edited July 27, 2012 by WinnieTheKhwai

[Ricardo]

I don't really trust Lonely Planet but it's not because I'm more advanced than the other backpackers, but because the information strikes me as dated and likely wrong.

I think you're right. Lonely Planet has wrestled with quality issues since Cummings left. It was reliable when he was still running the show. Tough to fill those shoes.

Agree 100%.

I just replaced my 8-year-old copy, with the latest (Feb 2012) version, and was disappointed to find that LP has gone up-market, dropping a lot of the detail on buses & cheaper-accomodation, while showing more up-market 4/5-star places ? Not really for me.

I guess the good news is, the guide is (so far) surviving as a printed-book, in the challenging internet-age.