The Thai tourism industry's future 'needs hard look'

[ourmanflint]

I am in the minority that believe that Thailand would still be a popular tourist destination without places like Pattaya and Nana etc. It's really hard to believe for those that came here for sex with poor country girls, but most tourists couldn't care less about such places. I would love to see the government clamp down on the sexpat community, it's time they moved on elsewhere.

[lildragon]

I am in the minority that believe that Thailand would still be a popular tourist destination without places like Pattaya and Nana etc. It's really hard to believe for those that came here for sex with poor country girls, but most tourists couldn't care less about such places. I would love to see the government clamp down on the sexpat community, it's time they moved on elsewhere.

They won't though, because of the people who owns those places are 'officials' from various agencies...

[joesanunu]

Parked just outside EVERY tourist hotel is a professional tourist scammer, posing as a taxi driver. His job is ripping off the customer.

Get rid of the predators if you want to make a better impression.

[Phuketboy]

I don't think they will need to worry because it's just not happening. If they continue like they are the only people walking around here will be the families that are originally from here. No tourists will come = businesses will close = less tourists come etc etc and the Thai's that are currently here for work will have gone home because no tourists and no businesses = no work.

Want to save tourism? Then put your hands in your pockets, close your mouths and open your ears. Listen for a change to advice and what people want and then implement that. However, we all know this will never happen in Thailand so the tourism industry is doomed.

[joesanunu]

Any foreigners on the TAT Board? That would be interesting.

A friend of mine in the tourism business says they are just as corrupt as any other Thai run agency.

Staffed and robbed blind by political appointees from the elite class.

The people at this level in Thai society despise foreigners. They don't do anything but cover crime up / bait foreigners and milk their TAT budget.

Just like every other State enterprise. TOT, PTT, Thai Air etc....The elite class treat these institutions like their personal piggy bank. And these crooks are connected to the untouchables, beyond criticism or investigation.

[falangjim]

I am in the minority that believe that Thailand would still be a popular tourist destination without places like Pattaya and Nana etc. It's really hard to believe for those that came here for sex with poor country girls, but most tourists couldn't care less about such places. I would love to see the government clamp down on the sexpat community, it's time they moved on elsewhere.

You do realize that Thais are just as fond of the sex-shops right here in their own country. Where do you suppose to move the local population because you don't like 'such places?'

[sgtsabai]

The big sex trade is Thai on Thai (or Lao), always has been, always will be. Still, us "sexpats" spend a lot of money here. I'm one of those "sexpats", former a "2 week (1 month) millionair" that fell in love with a lovely lady over 7 yrs. ago and am still married to her. I spend over 100,000 baht a month (kids, house, truck, etc, etc.)in the local community, where it should be spent, not given to the big wig hi-so's. I wish all the do-gooder troglidytes would crawl back in the holes from which they crawled from, or take their bibles and move on elsewhere. I had enough of the bible belt, bible thumpers back in the states. Some of the worst people I ever met.

[tomacht8]

Of natural resources, Thailand has actually for all target groups everything.

But it falls short in the planning, management and implementation.

Usually only quickly cooked ideas and little thought outs.

I suspect that there are no coordinated short- medium- and long-term development plannings.

Table:

1 Year 2-4 Years longer 4 Years

Target Groups Actions / goals Actions / goals Actions / goals

short term medium term long-term

Backpackers ? ? ?

Sex tourists ? ? ?

Families with children ? ? ?

China bus tourists ? ? ?

Medicine tourists ? ? ?

Pensioners/Longstayers ? ? ?

Honeymooners ? ? ?

Thai Tourists ? ? ?

and more Groups

What are the structures of each target group?

Desires, needs, budget, length of stay, revisitation rate, share of total tourism revenue, etc.?

Also unclear!

Et quo vadis Thailand?

[luk AJ]

Backpackers have made Thailand into a big holidaydestination. They told their family's back home about their stay and later the big herds came here.

Then Thailand was still cheap and honest. Now it's expensive and full of scams.

It's time Myanmar opens up their beaches in the Andaman sea, can't wait to go there.

absolutely, once Myanmar is ready it will be the top touristic destination in Asia. I hope I can move to Myanmar in a couple of years.

[gamini]

Let's do the math:

A backpacker that stays in a family-run home stay, eats meals at a family-run noodle shop and drinks a few beers in a small family-run bar...

Backpacker stays 26 weeks and spends an average of 1000B/day = 182,000B or $6000USD.

Most of that money stays in the pockets of family businesses, and is spread out to other family businesses in the local area.

By contrast, The Ugly Rich Tourist stays in hotels owned by Corporations, which pay their employees little because they should be "grateful" to work in a "resort".

The Rich Tourist eats inside the hotel, because they're "afraid" of eating better food on the street. They hit only a few tourist attractions, enriching the local economy little.

They fly back home in a week or two, because they are "impotent" people with "things to do and places to go".

The Rich Tourist spends far less than the $6000 dropped by the "dirty" backpacker.

DO THE MATH.

. You dont seem to like rich people because you are perhaps poor and envious? Why should rich tourists be ugly? Why should they be impotent/ . Perhaps you are ugly and impotent. They don't walk around half naked and covered with tatoos! I have many wealthy friends visit me and they spend far more than $6000. The " corporation" hotels that they stay in pay thier staff a far better salary than most other hotels. You must live in a different world than I do,

[PaPiPuPePo]

Most of that money stays in the pockets of family businesses, and is spread out to other family businesses in the local area.

The Rich Tourist spends far less than the $6000 dropped by the "dirty" backpacker."

I completely agree High End is not the way to go, they don't spend where it's needed (locally).

I remember reading back in the day that in Nepal, 2 out of every $3 spent by visitors went back out of the country; considering all of the porters I saw carrying baskets of coke bottles up the mountain trails, that ratio sounded very possible. I doubt the percentages are much different, actually it's probably a higher percentage going to multinational corporations than it used to be.

So yes it's likely that the more humble travellers help the local economy more than the "quality tourists."

Edited February 23, 2015 by PaPiPuPePo

[MZurf]

Let's be honest, there is very, very little in Thailand that would attract 'quality' tourists when compared to most other tropical vacation spots. One would hardly struggle with the decision whether to go to Fiji or Thailand, or the Maldives vs. Thailand. Thailand has so little to offer besides the usual wat visit, or the few beautiful beaches surrounded with squaller. Thailand will have to resign itself to the fact that it is a vacation spot for sex tourism, backpackers and Chinese looking for affordable warm vacations. Thailand is light years away from being a vacation draw to the rich & famous.

Well it is a question if you want 10 rich and famous or 1000 middle class

I belive for Thailand the question should rather be if they want 1000 middle class or 10000 working class. The high end tourists are not coming to Thailand in droves anyway.

Edited February 23, 2015 by MZurf

[MZurf]

"Let's do the math:

A backpacker that stays in a family-run home stay, eats meals at a family-run noodle shop and drinks a few beers in a small family-run bar...

Backpacker stays 26 weeks and spends an average of 1000B/day = 182,000B or $6000USD.

Most of that money stays in the pockets of family businesses, and is spread out to other family businesses in the local area.

By contrast, The Ugly Rich Tourist stays in hotels owned by Corporations, which pay their employees little because they should be "grateful" to work in a "resort".

The Rich Tourist eats inside the hotel, because they're "afraid" of eating better food on the street. They hit only a few tourist attractions, enriching the local economy little.

They fly back home in a week or two, because they are "impotent" people with "things to do and places to go".

The Rich Tourist spends far less than the $6000 dropped by the "dirty" backpacker."

I completely agree High End is not the way to go, they don't spend where it's needed (locally). I remember in Cairns roughly 2008 (Australia) they local government rallied to get rid of the dirty backpacker types then they realized just how much they actually spent locally.....Oops!!!

IMO the ones wanting the high end tourists are the very ones that own the high end hotels etc & who owns these hotels the elite.......and they could not care less about the ordinary Thai worker or business.

Oh, the rich gods NOT.......I was at a nice cafe in CM dressed clean casual & was just waiting to be served & waiting anyway a couple (USA) then sat down & looked the goods, immediately the waiter charged over to serve them. 1 OJ & 1 Fruit smoothie..........I on the other hand ordered eventually a Burger with the lot, fries & a large bottle of beer........A quality tourist is one that spends money not one that just looks like they could.

Yes, the noble poor vs the ugly rich. What a bunch of crock! The main reasons we rich guys don't like to eat street food is because why would we want to buy crap when we can afford quality?? An added benefit of eating in high end establishments is that we do not have to mingle with rabble like you.

[tonbridgebrit]

Let's be honest, there is very, very little in Thailand that would attract 'quality' tourists when compared to most other tropical vacation spots. One would hardly struggle with the decision whether to go to Fiji or Thailand, or the Maldives vs. Thailand. Thailand has so little to offer besides the usual wat visit, or the few beautiful beaches surrounded with squaller. Thailand will have to resign itself to the fact that it is a vacation spot for sex tourism, backpackers and Chinese looking for affordable warm vacations. Thailand is light years away from being a vacation draw to the rich & famous.

I agree, in a way. But those three groups, "backpackers, sex tourists and Chinese looking for affordable warm vacations". Those three groups do actually generate a fair amount of income, even though income per tourist is not high. Is it bad for Thailand if Thailand was to target those three groups, and double tourist arrivals (and tourist income) mainly from those three groups ?

Yes, Thailand is trying to increase the number of the high-spending tourists, and some Thais seem to not want so many down-market tourists. Yes, converting Thailand to a destination for mainly up-market tourists is something that is NOT going to work. I agree, other places are far better suited to catering for up-market tourists than Thailand. I'm just trying to say that Thailand is carrying out the wrong policy IF it wants to attract the up-market tourists only.

[halloween]

Perhaps they could make Yingluk in her cell a tourist exhibit. After all jailed female ex-PMs are a pretty rare species.

I would pay the ten-fold price to see it.

In fact, why not a museum devoted to the rice scam and other Thaksinist crimes. Little dioramas of ministers hatching G2G deals with Nattiwut's trucks carting away the rice, an exhibit showing the size of the rice mountain and a corresponding stack of B1000 notes to the amount lost (that would impress the locals), diagrams explaining the dodgy deals (eg taxpayers' money to Cambodia and then back to Thaksin). Just what we need, a corruption museum with a statue of Thaksin and a live (but rapidly ageing) Yingluk.

Edited February 23, 2015 by halloween

[ExPratt]

It seems to me with their constant inflated claims and new "Out there" schemes to attract tourists they are somewhat insecure about the future Tourist numbers, Lets face it they invest very little back into the Tourist industry and infrastructure , so its pretty much Money for old rope

[joesanunu]

Most of that money stays in the pockets of family businesses, and is spread out to other family businesses in the local area.

The Rich Tourist spends far less than the $6000 dropped by the "dirty" backpacker."

I completely agree High End is not the way to go, they don't spend where it's needed (locally).

I remember reading back in the day that in Nepal, 2 out of every $3 spent by visitors went back out of the country; considering all of the porters I saw carrying baskets of coke bottles up the mountain trails, that ratio sounded very possible. I doubt the percentages are much different, actually it's probably a higher percentage going to multinational corporations than it used to be.

So yes it's likely that the more humble travellers help the local economy more than the "quality tourists."

Some don't relize a five star hotel will generate 700 local jobs. Not to mention all the money spent on suppliers, builders, restaurants, manufacturers, taxes etc.

High end travelers leave lots more money behind than a backpacker.

[ourmanflint]

I am in the minority that believe that Thailand would still be a popular tourist destination without places like Pattaya and Nana etc. It's really hard to believe for those that came here for sex with poor country girls, but most tourists couldn't care less about such places. I would love to see the government clamp down on the sexpat community, it's time they moved on elsewhere.

You do realize that Thais are just as fond of the sex-shops right here in their own country. Where do you suppose to move the local population because you don't like 'such places?'

I was reasonably specific I thought, Nana and Pattaya are not there for the local thai trade and that is a whole other matter. I am not even against it per se, but I am fed up to the back teeth of hearing how so many TV posters think that is the only reason people go to Thailand.

[Mencken]

None of this speculation matters - Thailand long ago developed its tourism industry based largely on the working classes. It cannot suddenly build luxury resorts to satisfy wealthy travelers and if they did, who isti say they would come? If the wealthy need tropical, the go to the Caribbean (incl Florida). But largely the enjoy Europe and civilized places where there are no airport sit ins, shooting in streets, buses burning and a stable country. People with money might visit once, sure. Then what?

Thailand is a corrupt, venal little nation that has made a ton of money serving cheap pleasures to cheap people.

The worlds economies are very, very different know. Thailand honestly as most countries is lucky to have any tourism. It should embrace what it is snd continue on said path. Its what it knows, its what it is snd what comes to it naturally.

The question is not of want or need. The question is what Thailand will do to ensure that millions of millionaires will repeatedly visit Thailand? When these people can holiday on the Amalfi coast and the Greek isles (which are gonna get as cheap as Thailand). Ski in Pyrenes (sp) and the Alps. Summers on the Rhine, French wine country and Norwegian fiords - or go to the US and enjoy 4-5 star hotels and all the natl patks, skiing in a number of world class areas.

Then there is the LUXURY cruise industry.

The really funny, insulting tbing is that small people's money is somehow not as good as big people's money. Ironically, Thailand has few big millionaires herself, perhaps fewer billionaires. Its future uncertain.

If Thailand wants the high rollers it needs to allow home ownership snd yacht registry. It needs to allow people to work from Thailand without concern over some petty law (not talking sbout teaching jobs or small business). Private banking and gold storage? Lol.

As long as Thailand sees outsiders as suckers and patsies, it will never, ever, ever attract high rollers. The plebs come, attracted by dunshine snd vice.

It really needs to get the Immigration bureaucrats to wipe the scowls of their faces and replace with Thai smile. No, that stupid elite card is not the answer. Paying for what should be essentially free does not cut it. Wealthy people do not want to be hassled at the airport when coming to stay at the villa they purchased for 25m baht.

How do you entice people with multiple homes that can go anywhere to Thailand? Well, up until now its just been curiosity and that is all it will ever be.

What will be the grand move to get millionaires flocking here for a two week holiday - repeatedly. That is Thailand's only question.

The Chinese are perfect for Thailand. They can be routed like sheep thru certsin tours, hotels, restaurants. Certain privilaged persons mske millions, the rest of the tourism industry falls apart.

If Thailand were smart, it would be asking itself, hiw can we reclaim our tourist numbers, regardless. Money is money. Just as importantly, the people that work in hospitality are often the poor and midfle class. Thailand just keeps cranking this faucet down tighter and tighter.

A huge part of the country is in/directly employed in the Tourism industry.

Nero fiddled, Rome burned.

Edited February 24, 2015 by Mencken

[joesanunu]

Is the Phuket taxi mafia still blockading cruise liner passengers that refuse to use their RIPOFF taxi service?

They even blockaded the US Navy Sailors.

This can't be good.

[LuckyLew]

Thailand will not change anything to improve the current situation

They keep making promises and issuing statements about this and that but nothing changes

Thais are seemiingly happy too use whatever resources at their disposal (illegal/legal) to make a buck

They have no concept of tomorrow or next year, they are happy to use all the resources and let them deplete

Once gone or ruined they will wonder what has happened

They need to learn to conserve and preserve

Once it is gone it is gone

[Mencken]

"Let's do the math:

A backpacker that stays in a family-run home stay, eats meals at a family-run noodle shop and drinks a few beers in a small family-run bar...

Backpacker stays 26 weeks and spends an average of 1000B/day = 182,000B or $6000USD.

Most of that money stays in the pockets of family businesses, and is spread out to other family businesses in the local area.

By contrast, The Ugly Rich Tourist stays in hotels owned by Corporations, which pay their employees little because they should be "grateful" to work in a "resort".

The Rich Tourist eats inside the hotel, because they're "afraid" of eating better food on the street. They hit only a few tourist attractions, enriching the local economy little.

They fly back home in a week or two, because they are "impotent" people with "things to do and places to go".

The Rich Tourist spends far less than the $6000 dropped by the "dirty" backpacker."

I completely agree High End is not the way to go, they don't spend where it's needed (locally). I remember in Cairns roughly 2008 (Australia) they local government rallied to get rid of the dirty backpacker types then they realized just how much they actually spent locally.....Oops!!!

IMO the ones wanting the high end tourists are the very ones that own the high end hotels etc & who owns these hotels the elite.......and they could not care less about the ordinary Thai worker or business.

Oh, the rich gods NOT.......I was at a nice cafe in CM dressed clean casual & was just waiting to be served & waiting anyway a couple (USA) then sat down & looked the goods, immediately the waiter charged over to serve them. 1 OJ & 1 Fruit smoothie..........I on the other hand ordered eventually a Burger with the lot, fries & a large bottle of beer........A quality tourist is one that spends money not one that just looks like they could.

Yes, the noble poor vs the ugly rich. What a bunch of crock! The main reasons we rich guys don't like to eat street food is because why would we want to buy crap when we can afford quality?? An added benefit of eating in high end establishments is that we do not have to mingle with rabble like you.

Totally agree with Brad's analysis.

You are not rich. Very few rich people visit Thailand let alone live here. Certainly none waste their time on this site other than obtaining visa information.

You moved here snd hate Thai food. Most likely live in a bubble. You'll be gone soon ...

What a snob.

[Mencken]

Myanmar.

Edited February 24, 2015 by Mencken