I have read so many negative comments and for what ? What does Thailand gain by joining ? And what do they lose by not joining ? From what i have read of those against Thailand not joining Have all stated about going to one of those other four countries from Thailand. So that means tourist have entered Thailand and others who state about entering Thailand from one of those four countries and for 45 countries that will still be free. So where are the negatives by Thailand not joining the other four countries ?

seriously im not so sure its a bad idea or a good idea, theoretically its a nice idea for backpackers on a long vacation of a few months to obtain a visa for all the above countries

But Thailand knows very well that the biggest spending tourists come just for a few weeks and blast big bucks on 5 star hotels and then leave

The multivisa may be more useful for the stringent travelers whom stay in guest houses and eat 30 baht meals and live off seven eleven snacks.

Thailand has always wanted to shake off its backpacker image and appeal to the luxury class

further more lets be honest, any Thai government will only focus on the here and now, they dont care about the country in a few years from now, its all about raping it for everything while they are in power, so when they get booted out they can build an empire elsewhere. why else do politicians run for government? and dont say its because they are compassionate souls, otherwise they would let monks do the job.

Can't see why they would want to join the scheme. If they did then people from UK, USA, etc would need to pay for a visa to Thailand, whereas it's free at the moment. So I don't see what Thailand has to gain by joining. It is more likely to drive tourists away if they have to apply for a visa to come here.

Thailand gains because reduced fees and regulations equate to more people coming and bringing more money.

Increased regulation keeps people away from Thailand both potential residents and tourists.

Foreign residents bring in at least 10 times as much money as tourists but are put to the back of the line by TAT & Immigration.

It is Thailand's way of wanting to stay in the 3rd world.

Short sighted and sad

Sue? Would make it very difficult, for all the visa runners. They had to go to Malaysia, instead of to to Burma, Laos, Cambodia, for another entry stamp.

Why would anyone sue? Would they sue Thailand or some other country?

Sorry, should have been a: 'Sad?'

I really have no idea, how that became a 'sue'!

I am having a hard time seeing all the negative feedback here. Or wait a second I forgot, all you ever hear is negative feedback about Thailand on this forum.

Been a while since I needed to do a visa run but if memory serves at least 50 bucks to get into any of the other countries.

Free in Thailand!!

Also Ma and Pa Kettle hop on a plane - fly to BKK then think, "hey I have a visa, lets goto Cambodia" instead of just staying in Thailand spending their money here.

The fact is this is not short sited on Thailand's part, it makes good sense, they are the regional tourist destination and where most people start, they get more tourist then all the others combined. If they make it really easy for you to cross the border - you will.

Remember we are talking about tourists here, not Non-O or semi-residents, they are in the region for a week tro a month and gone.

Now if they wanted to take that to the next level. Charge people a couple hundred bucks to renew their visa in country, rather then having to leave. They would make a ton of cash there and semi-residents wouldn't be spending money on hotels, etc. in neighboring countries that could be spent on Thai soil.

I agree, it's a nonsense that we have to travel out of the country every 90 days. I live close to Laos but it still costs $50 to $60 each trip.

Why can't they give a stamp in the Immigration office and charge $40

Oh, they can.

Actually, they really want that!

Looks like, you are not qualified for this 'extension of stay' stamp. And would cost you 60+ bucks, for a year.

Thailand is the HUB of everything known to man so the rest of ASEAN should be following Thailand or at least listening to them or else they are going to go down the toilet.

Yeah ok sarcasim.

Well it would seem like we have many different opinions on this topic.

I like the idea.

When I first came to Thailand for a holiday if I had been told I could get a visa for 4 other countries that is what I would have done. I would probably not have come to Thailand as I only had a month. Today I live here and like it very much. I think the government is forgetting that a lot of the tourists are first time and given the chance to visit 4 different countries with only one visa they will take it.

As the years go by the other countries will grow in popularity and Thailand will not be considered for vacations near as much as it is now.

Short range they wil probably make some money off of not belonging. Long range they will loose money as tourists discover the other countries and talk about them when they go home.

I can't see any of the other countries taking over from Thailand any time soon. 50% of visitors to Thailand come back again. For Vietnam the figure is 5%. So how can a country like Vietnam take over from Thailand. Cambodia and Laos don't have beaches like Thailand have. Thailand is where people want to come and that is demonstrated by visitor numbers and return visitors. The others have no hope of catching up in the next 50 years.

In fact, it is the other countries that will lose long-term because they charge for visas, while most people don't need to pay to visit Thailand. If these countries want more visitors then they should offer a free visa on arrival facility, not some silly scheme to make people apply for a visa beforehand.

If they lose tons of revenue why would they even consider it? Lol these are tourist destinations. They don't make money from being nice or convenient lol

I am having a hard time seeing all the negative feedback here. Or wait a second I forgot, all you ever hear is negative feedback about Thailand on this forum.

Been a while since I needed to do a visa run but if memory serves at least 50 bucks to get into any of the other countries.

Free in Thailand!!

Also Ma and Pa Kettle hop on a plane - fly to BKK then think, "hey I have a visa, lets goto Cambodia" instead of just staying in Thailand spending their money here.

The fact is this is not short sited on Thailand's part, it makes good sense, they are the regional tourist destination and where most people start, they get more tourist then all the others combined. If they make it really easy for you to cross the border - you will.

Remember we are talking about tourists here, not Non-O or semi-residents, they are in the region for a week tro a month and gone.

Now if they wanted to take that to the next level. Charge people a couple hundred bucks to renew their visa in country, rather then having to leave. They would make a ton of cash there and semi-residents wouldn't be spending money on hotels, etc. in neighboring countries that could be spent on Thai soil.

I agree, it's a nonsense that we have to travel out of the country every 90 days. I live close to Laos but it still costs $50 to $60 each trip.

Why can't they give a stamp in the Immigration office and charge $40

The answer is because you are a tourist and not entitled to stay in the country long-term. You are bending the rules by doing visa runs, One day they will clamp down on it and then you won't be able to stay. In some countries you can get a 90-day visa but then can't come back within 90 days of leaving. Tourist visas are not for long-term residents. You are a tourist, and the world doesn't revolve around you.

Can't see why they would want to join the scheme. If they did then people from UK, USA, etc would need to pay for a visa to Thailand, whereas it's free at the moment. So I don't see what Thailand has to gain by joining. It is more likely to drive tourists away if they have to apply for a visa to come here.

Thailand gains because reduced fees and regulations equate to more people coming and bringing more money.

Increased regulation keeps people away from Thailand both potential residents and tourists.

Foreign residents bring in at least 10 times as much money as tourists but are put to the back of the line by TAT & Immigration.

It is Thailand's way of wanting to stay in the 3rd world.

No it is Thailands way of saying that they know foreign residents are happy with thier lot because they stay. Thailand knows you are not leaving that is wahy you are at the back of the line. To Thailand the foreign resident is a little like a lemon tree, it's been planted in the soil and takes little caring for, piss on it every now and then and it will bloom and bear fruit for the picking. The roots are established so it is not going to walk away.

Can't see why they would want to join the scheme. If they did then people from UK, USA, etc would need to pay for a visa to Thailand, whereas it's free at the moment. So I don't see what Thailand has to gain by joining. It is more likely to drive tourists away if they have to apply for a visa to come here.

The idea seems to be that, if you were to apply for a Thai visa, you would automatically get a visa for all the other countries as well. As in the Schengen countries, you don't need to apply for a visa, if your nationality is exempt from a visa. Thus tourists from the UK, US etc would not be affected, since they would still obtain a Thai transit visa on arrival for free in the same way they enter Schengen countries. What the Thai side is worried about is that other countries will waive fees for Chinese tourists who will then be able to fly to, say Ho Chi Minh or KL, first and avoid paying the Thai visa fee.

Can't see why they would want to join the scheme. If they did then people from UK, USA, etc would need to pay for a visa to Thailand, whereas it's free at the moment. So I don't see what Thailand has to gain by joining. It is more likely to drive tourists away if they have to apply for a visa to come here.

The idea seems to be that, if you were to apply for a Thai visa, you would automatically get a visa for all the other countries as well. As in the Schengen countries, you don't need to apply for a visa, if your nationality is exempt from a visa. Thus tourists from the UK, US etc would not be affected, since they would still obtain a Thai transit visa on arrival for free in the same way they enter Schengen countries. What the Thai side is worried about is that other countries will waive fees for Chinese tourists who will then be able to fly to, say Ho Chi Minh or KL, first and avoid paying the Thai visa fee.

Not joining the scheme is clearly short sighted on a macro level because Chinese tour operators are going to organise tours that skip Thailand to save the trouble and expense of Thai visas. They already do tours in Europe that skip the UK for this reason. Each incremental tourist would easily earn the Thai government more than the visa fee in VAT receipts not to mention the revenue that goes to Thai businesses employees that pay tax.

At the micro level it makes absolute sense because the people who control the pool of funds generated by visa fees will not have access to the alternative tax revenue streams. They are just looking at their personal benefits in syphoning off from the funds under their control and no one in the government is willing to push aside their vested interests for the good of the nation. Sadly this is the norm in Thailand.

Makes more sense now that you've explained about the Chinese tourists. But I think the fact is that Thailand is the major tourist destination and most Chinese would rather come here than the other countries. With Europe the Chinese have a very large choice of quality destinations if they get a Schengen visa, so doesn't matter so much if they skip the UK. But I can't imagine people travelling to just the other four and skipping Thailand. Vietnam for example has next to no return visitors because visitors have negative experiences there. The other four would have to change dramatically to steal Thailand's tourists, and that just isn't going to happen any time soon. The others are nice to visit once, but tourists come back to Thailand again and again. Thailand is able to stand on it's own.

But I think if Thailand did join, you'd still get people on her complaining, because they would claim Thailand did it just to stop visa runners going to neighboring countries, which they wouldn't be able to do if Thailand joined. You know what it's like on this forum - whether Thailand joins or not they will still get slated by the people on here. Thailand can do nothing right as far as many on this forum are concerned. Many posters who have just complained that they didn't join will be back on here complaining if they do join at a later date. These people can't be pleased, so are best ignored.

And for the US citizens complaining, why don't the US join up with Canada and others and offer one visa for multiple countries? You expect other countries to join schemes like this, but I don't see you demanding that your own countries do the same.

What the Thai side is worried about is that other countries will waive fees for Chinese tourists who will then be able to fly to, say Ho Chi Minh or KL, first and avoid paying the Thai visa fee.

Why so many people think, Malaysia is part of the agreement, between Burma, Laos, Cambodia and Vietnam and (now not) Thailand?

As we say in the states, "Stepping over dollars to save nickels."

Waiving fees is not a reason to not join a system like this.

Immigration is a security issue, not a revenue centre. If the net effect is no change to security, but an increase in revenue over those generated by visas they should do it. The point of tourists is not to generate revenue for immigration or embassies.

Waiving fees is not a reason to not join a system like this.

Immigration is a security issue, not a revenue centre. If the net effect is no change to security, but an increase in revenue over those generated by visas they should do it. The point of tourists is not to generate revenue for immigration or embassies.

I got your point.

Who's going to tell this to the people in embassies, consulates and to the immigration officers?

Waiving fees is not a reason to not join a system like this.

Immigration is a security issue, not a revenue centre. If the net effect is no change to security, but an increase in revenue over those generated by visas they should do it. The point of tourists is not to generate revenue for immigration or embassies.

I got your point.

Who's going to tell this to the people in embassies, consulates and to the immigration officers?

Well of course, it is a nice idea, that the embassies and immigration self fund themselves with fees, but then you get to the ridiculous 90 day reports and visa runs to generate revenue which in the case of visa runs actually drags money out of the country because people pay to stay in hotels outside the country. It is all ass about face.

I can just imagine the concept of say the London or Singapore embassy sitting there aghast, "but, but, but, we will end up losing money", as though an government embassy is supposed to be a profit making exercise, because they are actually generating money from people going down there for example to make B visas. All ass about face.

Has anyone else read that ASEAN through the TPP (Trans Pacific Partnership) is a Western scheme to isolate/contain China? I read a report to that effect when in KL two weeks ago.

Has anyone else read that ASEAN through the TPP (Trans Pacific Partnership) is a Western scheme to isolate/contain China? I read a report to that effect when in KL two weeks ago.

Of course there is an element of that behind it. If they don't join up somehow, over time, Chinese companies will eat up all the South East Asian companies.

How's my maths??

"Thailand alone received 20 million visitors in 2011, [compered with] more than the 12.3 million combined arrivals in the four countries. Thailand projects 26 million tourists in 2015 while CLMV nations aim at 25 million."

Thailand is set to grow by 30% while the other 4 (who Thailand seem to be condesending towards) are set to grow by 100%.

So where will stupid Thailand be in 2020???

But all of the other countries listed require visas, while a majority of nationalities don't need any visa to enter Thailand?

So why bother joining? Seems it would just cause more administrative costs with no benefit as most tourist just get a 30 day stamp upon arrival (no visa required)

Really do not understand the negative comments at all???

Have to agree with you as well. The only option where Thailand should review its policies is the Chinese tourists as they are an important factor to the inbound market of Thailand but then again the Chinese government charges as well for a tourist visa to China so why should Thailand drop the visa fees

But all of the other countries listed require visas, while a majority of nationalities don't need any visa to enter Thailand?

So why bother joining? Seems it would just cause more administrative costs with no benefit as most tourist just get a 30 day stamp upon arrival (no visa required)

Really do not understand the negative comments at all???

Have to agree with you as well. The only option where Thailand should review its policies is the Chinese tourists as they are an important factor to the inbound market of Thailand but then again the Chinese government charges as well for a tourist visa to China so why should Thailand drop the visa fees

Much more, as only few Thais, but many Chinese travel, right?

If its factual that Thailand gets more tourists than the other 4 countries combined, then Thailand should rightly think about how to keep this advantage and expand on it. Any other expressed concerns would be diplomatic chitchat. One rule trumps all _"follow the money"

But all of the other countries listed require visas, while a majority of nationalities don't need any visa to enter Thailand?

So why bother joining? Seems it would just cause more administrative costs with no benefit as most tourist just get a 30 day stamp upon arrival (no visa required)

Really do not understand the negative comments at all???

Have to agree with you as well. The only option where Thailand should review its policies is the Chinese tourists as they are an important factor to the inbound market of Thailand but then again the Chinese government charges as well for a tourist visa to China so why should Thailand drop the visa fees

They think they will discourage the chinese from overlanding out of thailand to csmbodia. Very short sighted.

I dont know people, getting into Thailand is a lot easier than getting into Australia, as long as it remains fairly easy to do I dont mind at all. For me to take my wife to Australia it costs a fortune and there is just so much bullsh*t you have to go through just to get a temporary visa, dont even think about tring to get one to live there.

Dennis

Australia is a piece of cake compared to the states and Canada. North America the Paranoia hub of the world.

HD, you are both right and wrong if you are talking about permanent resident status in the US (I don't know about Canada). If you are talking about tourist visas I'm afraid I don't know. There are many hoops to jump through for a US "green card" but once the gc is attained there are no reporting requirements or anything for ten years. For the next ten years the gov wants to know if there are any changes. No? Okay, here's ten more years (Oh yeah, send a current picture and $600). I can prove my worthiness to live in Thailand but have to prove it over and over again, a huge pain in the butt for the privilege of spending my money in Thailand.

However, it's what I gotta do so I will do it to continue living here with "My Sweet Patootie".

Has anyone else read that ASEAN through the TPP (Trans Pacific Partnership) is a Western scheme to isolate/contain China? I read a report to that effect when in KL two weeks ago.

so those westerners had the forsight in 1967?

Has anyone else read that ASEAN through the TPP (Trans Pacific Partnership) is a Western scheme to isolate/contain China? I read a report to that effect when in KL two weeks ago.

so those westerners had the forsight in 1967?

Considering the period, am sure they did?

But, but, but, arent they the hub?

Well exactly. Thailand continues to piss on the ASEAN. community. Next it will be that Thailand cannot accept the freedom of movement of ASEAN labor. For twenty years I've watched Thai dreams go crashing down the toilet as the day of fruition of one project after another dies. What exactly goes on between Thai ears.

How's my maths??

"Thailand alone received 20 million visitors in 2011, [compered with] more than the 12.3 million combined arrivals in the four countries. Thailand projects 26 million tourists in 2015 while CLMV nations aim at 25 million."

Thailand is set to grow by 30% while the other 4 (who Thailand seem to be condesending towards) are set to grow by 100%.

So where will stupid Thailand be in 2020???

Exactly.

Most of the posters here who are against it are overlooking the fact that the other four countries will be upgrading their tourist attractions. They are basing all their claims on today's situation never changing. I am afraid they are in for a big surprise.

The average tourist is not going to be bothered by a 1,500 baht visa to visit four different countries.I am not familiar with all the tourist attractions in the other countries but from what I have heard Burma has a lot of them and it has a long coat line for resorts. I would bet that Thailand has nothing to compare with Angkor Wat in Cambodia.

For the family tourists yes they will probably stay in one country and Thailand has lots of beaches with resorts on them. But as I said the other nations are not going to just sit idly by and watch Thailand take all the tourists. Burma is just now coming awake they by themselves will eventually hurt Thailand.

I can see where the people who have to leave the country every so often will get hurt but I really don't think Thailand is even considering that. The big question is what if Thailand does join in. Will we retirees still be able to stay with out it getting into a mess?

I arrived in Newcastle - NEWCASTLE, not Heathrow or Gatwick and waited a sodding hour to get through Immigration there.

Do you look like your avatar?

Yes, that would explain the haste to get him out of one country and the delays getting in to another.

Got your rabies certificate, old boy?

Ouch! Good one!