I personally think they should charge the hell out of tourists (who have no problem paying 300 baht for a martini; they are on vacation), and charge a minimal amount to locals.

How would they determine who a tourist is? Are you saying there would be an immigration booth at every BTS station and every single person would have to go through an immigration check? If somebody forgot their ID card or passport at home, then they could not ride the BTS?

perhaps i could have been more clear, but i was simply saying charge a lot more for people buying single journey tickets and keep the "trips" via the 30 day cards (rabbit cards) the same price. the more i think about it, i am saying people who are "tourists" when it comes to the bts, ie the ones who use it rarely. in short, charge the hell out of people who never use the system.

think about what a price hike would do to a worker commuting everyday, vs what one would do to a thai or especially foreigner who uses the bts once and has to pay 60 instead of 30 baht.

think about what a price hike would do to a worker commuting everyday, vs what one would do to a thai or especially foreigner who uses the bts once and has to pay 60 instead of 30 baht.

More taxi use, more congested roads, more road maintenance, more air pollution. That's what I think. The whole point of mass transportation is to get as many people as possible to use it.

think about what a price hike would do to a worker commuting everyday, vs what one would do to a thai or especially foreigner who uses the bts once and has to pay 60 instead of 30 baht.

More taxi use, more congested roads, more road maintenance, more air pollution. That's what I think. The whole point of mass transportation is to get as many people as possible to use it.

Right. I think we agree? KEep the prices the same for those that use it heavily, which will get "as many people as possible using it" on a daily basis, and charge the hell out of the people who hardly ever use it. Forgive if I was unclear.

think about what a price hike would do to a worker commuting everyday, vs what one would do to a thai or especially foreigner who uses the bts once and has to pay 60 instead of 30 baht.

More taxi use, more congested roads, more road maintenance, more air pollution. That's what I think. The whole point of mass transportation is to get as many people as possible to use it.

Right. I think we agree? KEep the prices the same for those that use it heavily, which will get "as many people as possible using it" on a daily basis, and charge the hell out of the people who hardly ever use it. Forgive if I was unclear.

I thought that was what they were doing? Remember that the purpose of the BTS is not to reduce congestion, but to provide an improved means of travelling around the city. It's there for the benefit of its riders and the businesses that they frequent, not for the benefit of car drivers.

So if people are willing to pay a fortune to use it every day, then they should be so charged. It's not a charity, and it's operation is not subsidised by municipal government. It is a business operating in a competitive environment, and they shold maximise their income so that they can invest and develop their service.

SC

utalkin2me, I understand now.

I personally think they should charge the hell out of tourists (who have no problem paying 300 baht for a martini; they are on vacation), and charge a minimal amount to locals.

How would they determine who a tourist is? Are you saying there would be an immigration booth at every BTS station and every single person would have to go through an immigration check? If somebody forgot their ID card or passport at home, then they could not ride the BTS?

perhaps i could have been more clear, but i was simply saying charge a lot more for people buying single journey tickets and keep the "trips" via the 30 day cards (rabbit cards) the same price. the more i think about it, i am saying people who are "tourists" when it comes to the bts, ie the ones who use it rarely. in short, charge the hell out of people who never use the system.

think about what a price hike would do to a worker commuting everyday, vs what one would do to a thai or especially foreigner who uses the bts once and has to pay 60 instead of 30 baht.

I think they should subsidise Thai fares with that of white people, except for me ..... thats what you're saying isn't it.

The sense of entitlement and greatness amongst Bangkoks sexpats is astounding.

Get on the bus or walk if a pound or so for a journey is too much for you, im presuming getting a better job or working more hours is out of the question.

How about a 50% tourist tax on beer and food so you can eat at a better rate? Or better still when we get off the airplane we just hand over a brown envelope stuffed with 1000 bahts to keep immigrant Caucasians in the life they clearly deserve.

lol. He was just saying they should raise the fares even higher but give a greater discount for the 30 day passes.

He shouldn't have said tourists initially. And don't forget the Japanese, Koreans, Africans, etc that are tourists and not white!

lol. He was just saying they should raise the fares even higher but give a greater discount for the 30 day passes.

He shouldn't have said tourists initially. And don't forget the Japanese, Koreans, Africans, etc that are tourists and not white!

Wow, somebody read past the first half of my first sentence

I really think people just read like 2 words a paragraph in here and then proceed to their "expedited spew" lol.

Truth is, tourists would be included in my pricing scheme, that is why I mentioned them.... anybody who didn't buy the 30 day passes would be getting charged even more than they are now... so I figured that would include most tourists (here meaning people in BKK for a short period).

Thanks for actually reading. Cheers.

Are you, guys, just arguing for a few THB increase?

It is just a question of WHO is going to absorb the brunt: daily users, infrequent/one-time users (including tourists) or both.

I personally think they should charge the hell out of tourists (who have no problem paying 300 baht for a martini; they are on vacation), and charge a minimal amount to locals.

How would they determine who a tourist is? Are you saying there would be an immigration booth at every BTS station and every single person would have to go through an immigration check? If somebody forgot their ID card or passport at home, then they could not ride the BTS?

perhaps i could have been more clear, but i was simply saying charge a lot more for people buying single journey tickets and keep the "trips" via the 30 day cards (rabbit cards) the same price. the more i think about it, i am saying people who are "tourists" when it comes to the bts, ie the ones who use it rarely. in short, charge the hell out of people who never use the system.

think about what a price hike would do to a worker commuting everyday, vs what one would do to a thai or especially foreigner who uses the bts once and has to pay 60 instead of 30 baht.

Pretty much agree. Office workers making scant wages, real hardship.

I would not be at allnhappy to.pay more because I have white skin OR need bts once a month.

Mrt and bts need to merge cards, especially if packagrs are going to be introduced.

I live on MRT and will never need a card unless I teach someday if ever. Really not happy to pay more than b20 to go Asoke Thong Lor <deleted>. Asoke to Ploen Chit or Chidlom!

Many office workers make a pittace and the buses are broken and packed to the ceiling.

Are you, guys, just arguing for a few THB increase?

B20 to 25 is 25%

think about what a price hike would do to a worker commuting everyday, vs what one would do to a thai or especially foreigner who uses the bts once and has to pay 60 instead of 30 baht.

More taxi use, more congested roads, more road maintenance, more air pollution. That's what I think. The whole point of mass transportation is to get as many people as possible to use it.

Right. I think we agree? KEep the prices the same for those that use it heavily, which will get "as many people as possible using it" on a daily basis, and charge the hell out of the people who hardly ever use it. Forgive if I was unclear.

I thought that was what they were doing? Remember that the purpose of the BTS is not to reduce congestion, but to provide an improved means of travelling around the city. It's there for the benefit of its riders and the businesses that they frequent, not for the benefit of car drivers.

So if people are willing to pay a fortune to use it every day, then they should be so charged. It's not a charity, and it's operation is not subsidised by municipal government. It is a business operating in a competitive environment, and they shold maximise their income so that they can invest and develop their service.

SC

Wholly correct, but it is chartered and sanctioned by the people of Bangkok. It does owe something as public service to the city. The city must get something out of the monopoly it extended, the land it consumes and the inconvenience in its building and maintenence. It is not at all the same as a shop or a bus.

...

I thought that was what they were doing? Remember that the purpose of the BTS is not to reduce congestion, but to provide an improved means of travelling around the city. It's there for the benefit of its riders and the businesses that they frequent, not for the benefit of car drivers.

So if people are willing to pay a fortune to use it every day, then they should be so charged. It's not a charity, and it's operation is not subsidised by municipal government. It is a business operating in a competitive environment, and they shold maximise their income so that they can invest and develop their service.

SC

Wholly correct, but it is chartered and sanctioned by the people of Bangkok. It does owe something as public service to the city. The city must get something out of the monopoly it extended, the land it consumes and the inconvenience in its building and maintenence. It is not at all the same as a shop or a bus.

I find buses inconvenience me more than the skytrain.

If the people of Bangkok want the BTS to take people out of their cars or off the buses, then the government should pay them a subsidy. As it is, the BTS provides a way for those that are willing to pay for it to travel quickly and reliably around the city centre. These are the people with the high value jobs, that contribute to the economy of the city. The BTS is sufficiently busy that it is clear their fares are not too expensive.

Most of the people that drive into Bangkok would still do so if the BTS was free - unless there was park and ride at the termini.

I don't know about you, but for me, the choice is "Taxi or BTS" for long journeys, and "Walk or BTS" for short journeys.

SC

50% increase is ok by me

Yes, but you are not:

A Thai national

A long time resident of Bangkok

An office worker making 12k a month with a 3k flat and no health insurance.

SC agsin I do not disagree, but I think part of that subsidy already exists because the people of BKK have allowed the BTS to exist, maintain and even grow itself. They put up with the hassles, the traffic jams caused by extensions (for years) and give it a monopoly as well.

Are you, guys, just arguing for a few THB increase?

B20 to 25 is 25%

Further, if you live near bang chak you are now paying about 75% more for the luxury of the extension to go one extra stop everyday. Point being, this seems like an increase in and of itself to me, and it JUST happened. Stipulating that, now they are talking about an increase on top of the very recent increase.

50% increase is ok by me

They have donation boxes just inside the BTS gates.

Are you, guys, just arguing for a few THB increase?

B20 to 25 is 25%

Further, if you live near bang chak you are now paying about 75% more for the luxury of the extension to go one extra stop everyday. Point being, this seems like an increase in and of itself to me, and it JUST happened. Stipulating that, now they are talking about an increase on top of the very recent increase.

If you feel hard done by, you could walk to On Nut. The Extension was paid for largely by the municipality, who demanded their pound of flesh in return. BTS has no control over that part of the fare. The works from On Nut to Mo Chit were entirely privately funded.

BTS are advised by very experienced operators, so I doubt that we are raising any new points, and I am sure that they will make a well-informed decision on their fare structure.

SC

It should be "fares", not "fare". The BTS is not a flat fare system, where "fare" would be appropriate, but a system with a multiple-fare structure, where "fares" is appropriate.

NNT should know that, but -- of course -- TIT.

Oh should it ? Aren't you a grammar nazzi.

In fact.. the TIT part seems to be just a manifestation of a deeper psychological problem.

But this is TVF hey.

TiT = Thaivisa is Thaivisa

I thought Puea Thai was going to make a 10B flat rate BTS fare?

I thought Puea Thai was going to make a 10B flat rate BTS fare?

And free beer as well?