SURVEY: Should Coffee Houses and Fast Food Restaurants be allowed to Charge an Overstay Fee?

[phantomfiddler]

I have a sign up on the wall requesting that anyone sitting in the establishment and using the free Wi-fi is expected to spend at least 75 Baht per hour. The sign only went up after one person took up 5 chairs with all his bags, whipped out his laptop computer, and used the free internet for 5.5 hours on one 25 Baht bottle of water ! Parasites will always be around to abuse the system. They scour the city for freebies, tell their parasite friends when they find them, and it is only fair to the landlords to make them pay something for a privilege.

[Kerryd]

One thing people are overlooking when comparing coffee houses/shops "in the west" to here is that, in the "west" when a group of people go into a Starbucks or Tim Hortons or MacDonalds (or wherever) and take up a table, they generally ALL order something. As well, when they've consumed that "something" they will (normally) pay up and leave, or order a refill, or buy something else.

I don't recall ever sitting in such a place and not ordering anything and only rarely have I been in a group where someone didn't order anything (normally because they just stopped by to say hi and then left a minute later). These days, turning off the free WiFi probably wouldn't help as it seems almost every mall has free WiFi now any ways.

A lot of bars have cover charges or "membership fees" or some other way to try and prevent people from coming in, ordering a bottle of water and spending 2-3 hours enjoying the music/entertainment/etc. Kind of hard to keep a business running if the majority of your "customers" aren't spending money.

Easy to say "talk with your feet" in an attempt to get a business to change it's practise (in this regard). The most likely outcome will be that the business will end up closing and all those non-paying customers will move somewhere else. Probably to that "nicer" place, where they will continue to do their thing until that business is also forced to close because they are suddenly not making any money.

It's not the business that needs to change. It's the attitude of the people using that business that needs to change.

[Alwyn]

Strictly No!

Why not just ask them to leave.

And I can't see how a coffee shop makes 1.000 Baht profit with a table in an hour.

I kind of agree, ask/tell then to leave. But.... let's say one table can sit 6 people and an average spend is 75 baht per person, that's 450 baht ) per table. Usually a person or people will be 20 minutes enjoying their coffees... I make that 1350 baht in potential lost revenue based on one hour. Thing is, these folk will stay for hours!

[kovaltech]

Strictly No!

Why not just ask them to leave.

And I can't see how a coffee shop makes 1.000 Baht profit with a table in an hour.

Exactly how i feel about that... just ask the person in question to vacate the place or to consume...

[hawker9000]

No.

Coffee shops or restaurants are meeting points. If the one you want to meet is late, getting kicked out would spoil the meeting, maybe to the disadvantage of the owner.

The poll question said "allowed"; not "required". And no, they are food establishments: people just use them as meeting points (which is fine, IF they're buying). A business owner should absolutely be able to set a time limit for sitting without a purchase. It should probably be posted in writing, and the owner can choose to suspend the rule during slow periods if he wishes, but no one is "entitled" to use these facilities or this space without being a customer (meaning, a "current", "paying" customer). Coffee shops and fast food facilities, which represent a significant commitment of owner time & money, are not squatting pads for those with "nowhere else to go".

[AlphMichaels]

If "camped out" in either, one has made the cognitive decision to consider the owner's investment in environment and WiFi theirs to use. Also likely that they've justified keeping low cost domicile and foregoing internet connect costs. Could be that rather than hanging out with one cup of coffee and a low cost computing device for hours at Tom&Tom's, one should consider looking for a part-time job to cover "luxury" expenses.

I side 100% with owners on this one. See it too much and it's become quite irritating.

Edited July 21, 2015 by AlphMichaels

[TEFLKrabi]

If you keep buying coffee, every 20-30 minutes then what is the problem. If you try to make one cup last 2 hours then there is a problem.

[micmichd]

No.

Coffee shops or restaurants are meeting points. If the one you want to meet is late, getting kicked out would spoil the meeting, maybe to the disadvantage of the owner.

Just to take that further.

Yes, a restaurant can be a meeting place, but, a meeting place where you buy and consume food while you have your meeting, be it 2 people or 4/6/8 people.

You surely don't expect a restaurant to let you sit and 'meet' without buying a meal do you?

Just trying to clarify your answer.

Friends come in a car and get stuck in a traffic jam or can't find a parking lot. This happened to me many times. If you run out of money, you have to go to ATM, and your seat may be gone when you come back. Too much hassle to tell your friends then that you changed your place while they're driving. Maybe only in problem in the bigger cities.

Fortunately I get credit in most of my favourite coffee shops and bars.

Restaurants that expect you to keep on consuming should accept payments by credit card.

Edited July 21, 2015 by micmichd

[hawker9000]

If "camped out" in either, one has made the cognitive decision to consider the owner's investment in environment and WiFi theirs to use. Also likely that they've justified keeping low cost domicile and foregoing internet connect costs. Could be that rather than hanging out with one cup of coffee and a low cost computing device for hours at Tom&Tom's, one should consider looking for a part-time job to cover "luxury" expenses.

I side 100% with owners on this one. See it too much and it's become quite irritating.

Too true. The freeloading squatters are actually preventing the owner from earning his livelihood by claiming space - without return - that paying customers might otherwise occupy. It's really a subtle kind of theft. 'Not much different from a squatter moving into your rental property and keeping you from successfully renting it by his mere presence there.

[Seastallion]

Not sure if it's the same now, but in the '90s the Korean coffee shop model was that you were actually paying for the sitting space and the coffee was effectively free. The reasoning was that coffee shops were favourite meeting places for courting couples who simply wanted a place to talk out of the cold/rain/heat.

Could it work here??

So, no take-out?

[zaphod reborn]

Yes, coffee shops, restaurants and (sorry to tell you this TV pub goers) bars should be allowed to charge for overstaying. Overstaying is occupying a table and not meeting the minimum checkbin requirement for keeping the table. It is up to the establishment to set the minimum order requirement. Nursing a coffee or beer while you watch free footie for 2 hours does not yield profit to the venue. There's lots of costs, including the ridiculous fee paid to CTH who should never been awarded the exclusive rights to broadcast by the BPL.

However, in introducing this poll, TV has misinterpreted the ruling in this matter.

"Recently a coffee house was allowed by the Consumer Protection Board to charge people for overstaying. Do you think it is fair to charge people who overstay in a coffee house or fast food restaurant and conduct business to charge an additional fee?"

That's not the issue decided by the CPB. Bon Cafe charged customers TB2000 for discussing business while using one of the shop's tables, even though the customers spent about 260 baht during a 2 1/2 hour stay. Therefore, the specific issue decided by the CPB was whether an additional charge can be made for holding a business meeting or discussing business while occupying a coffee shop table. The ruling was that such a charge is acceptable, if there is conspicuous signage warning of the charge.

Unfortunately, the CPB was in error. The nature of the conversation held at a table in a restaurant, bar or coffee shop should never be regulated (unless it presents a clear and present security risk). The length of time one may occupy a table can be regulated and that is why I answered affirmatively to the survey question.

[Seastallion]

They can charge what they like for anything that is theirs to sell.

One major proviso: Well advertised, displayed list of charges, and if any particular charge is unusual or high, staff must tell each and every customer before the customer partakes to make sure it is clearly understood.

Then it's the customer's choice to buy or not.

Whatever a shop owner decides to charge is part of his business model...as long as it is honest, if it works for him, then fine. Honest business models/practices should not be regulated.

[micmichd]

Changed my vote from 'No' to 'Yes'.

Should be up to the café / restaurant how to handle problems.

[gyrosman]

Yes, provided rules / charges are published.

Politely ushering them out would be the better option I think.

Have you tried to have a rational discussion with a Thai.

[jackh]

I had this same problem in China. They come in to play cards for hours and use wi-fi. Then they order hot water to drink (free).

I posted a sign that customers must purchase a drink or food and card playing is not allowed. Biz is good and the riff raff are gone.

Businesses should be allowed to do whatever they feel is right to maintain paying customers. These PITA people only piss off paying customers and ruin your business.

[mercman24]

IMO i think of how busy the place is, i think human nature being what it is , as me being a customer, if i look through the window and see a few customers, i go in, but if i see an empty cafe,i keep walking,same mentality as to bars, see an empty bar, and not go in, i bet there are lots like me that do this without even thinking about it, its like your brain is on auto pilot. lol

[johnno2]

No.

Coffee shops or restaurants are meeting points. If the one you want to meet is late, getting kicked out would spoil the meeting, maybe to the disadvantage of the owner.

wrong. a coffee shop or fast food outlet makes money from selling coffee etc. if someone is sitting there for 2 hours and drinks one coffee, that's a lot of money that business is missing out on. Parks are meeting points, go to the park if you want to sit around all day. the owner of the coffee shop or fast food outlet is now responsible for your meeting? that's really weird

[Fullstop]

Should Coffee Houses and Fast Food Restaurants be allowed to Charge an Overstay Fee?

Of course they should be allowed to do that. As long as they display the condition on a prominent notice on the wall.

All business's should be free to cut their own throats if that is what they wish.

[johnno2]

Strictly No!

Why not just ask them to leave.

And I can't see how a coffee shop makes 1.000 Baht profit with a table in an hour.

250baht for four people...15 mins to drink...x 4 = 1000 baht per hr

noooooooo, 15 mins to drink a coffee X4= 1000 baht per 15 mins.

but people go there now for 2 or 3 hours means that 1000 for 2 or 3 hours. big difference.

at the rate of 1000 per 15 mins, after 3 hours, that table could have made the owner 12,000 baht, not 1000.

if the business has 20 tables, they could have made 240,000 baht.

if people sit for 3 hours, they only make 20,000 baht.

still think "no"? don't go into business if you still think "no"

[johnno2]

No.

Coffee shops or restaurants are meeting points. If the one you want to meet is late, getting kicked out would spoil the meeting, maybe to the disadvantage of the owner.

Just to take that further.

Yes, a restaurant can be a meeting place, but, a meeting place where you buy and consume food while you have your meeting, be it 2 people or 4/6/8 people.

You surely don't expect a restaurant to let you sit and 'meet' without buying a meal do you?

Just trying to clarify your answer.

Friends come in a car and get stuck in a traffic jam or can't find a parking lot. This happened to me many times. If you run out of money, you have to go to ATM, and your seat may be gone when you come back. Too much hassle to tell your friends then that you changed your place while they're driving. Maybe only in problem in the bigger cities.

Fortunately I get credit in most of my favourite coffee shops and bars.

Restaurants that expect you to keep on consuming should accept payments by credit card.

do you understand the concept of "being prepared"? please don't go into business. I find your last comment most puzzling. a restaurant makes money by people consuming food/drinks. if someone is sitting there having a meeting for 3 hours, they aren't going to make money from that table. conference rooms make money by charging people to have a meeting.

[micmichd]

I understand the concept of "being prepared". If I show too much cash in public, I'll have too many "friends". It's usually my gf that comes up with the cash (whatever people may think then, we don't care) And it's usually her who's looking for a parking lot while I'm waiting.

Anyway, we've got our favourite places where staff know us. So, no problem really.

BTW, I'm not very good in doing business, that's why I changed my initial vote.

[Thakkar]

For most businesses, the most difficult part is getting the customer in the door. Once they're in and you fail to make money off them, the problem is in the way you run your business, not the customer.

Anything that smacks of penalisation, as in the of the Bon Cafè news story, is a bad businesses move. It subtly antagonises even the customers who don't stay long. It makes your business look unfriendly to all the other customers (which is most of your customers) who aren't abusing the place. As the much-aggrieved business owner you might think that surely these reasonable people would understand why you have to do this, but why should they? They have their own life problems; they don't care about your problems.

There are many subtle ways to discourage free-loading. Charging, or even threatening to charge 1000 baht an hour isn't one.

If you want to know how, please buy my book: The Secret Art of Subtle Arsehollery.

T

[Gillyflower]

A while back I was in a restaurant on Rathwithi in CM. Two young women (not together) were seated at two tables for four. Free wifi and they had been there for quite a while with just a juice. The place was full and many would be customers around. Several times people asked if they could sit at these tables and each time the two girls refused. The owner spoke to them,and asked them to at least sit at the same table. To no avail. He just switched of the wifi. They soon went.

[little mary sunshine]

Reasonable time should be 45-60

Minutes, notice should be posted

At entrance and on tables.

[anotheruser]

Businesses should be able to do whatever they want if it doesn't endanger the health of the customers.

[hawksway]

Give 30 minutes Internet Access time on the Network against each bill. Easily managed.

[bristolgeoff]

if they is a big sign in thai and English telling the customer the charges or services that cost.then the person can make the choice of staying or going.or ask the person who serves them.then everyone happy and no one stays longer.the car parks in the uk for supermarkets clearly state the time you can stay before a ticket or clamping is in force

[fish fingers]

coffee shops shd launch 1 hr tables to use during busy periods. This will mean less spongers sitting for 3 hrs with an empty drink.

hmm maybe that won't work but it might help. The problem with that of course is they will wait until the open tables are free..

Edited July 21, 2015 by fish fingers

[hawker9000]

No.

Coffee shops or restaurants are meeting points. If the one you want to meet is late, getting kicked out would spoil the meeting, maybe to the disadvantage of the owner.

No.

They are used as meeting places. They are actually (gasp) coffee shops and restaurants. Coffee shops and restaurants are in business (bigger gasp) to sell coffee and food, not to provide freeloaders with a place to plant their backsides and scrounge the wifi.

What you're obstinately refusing to get is that everyone's merely saying this should be the owner's choice, not that it should be a requirement! It may be bad for business, or it may be good for business. It's not the customer's business; it's the OWNER'S business, as in, he OWNS it! HIS business, so up to HIM to decide what's good for it and what isn't. If he wants to drive out those just taking up space and not buying anything to make room for paying customers, he should obviously be able to do so.

The point isn't whether it should be done or not; the point is that the owner should be able to do it - or not - at HIS discretion.

As for the idea that "empty" seats discourage patronage, some people PREFER not waiting in long lines or for slow, backed up service, and being able to sit wherever they want... Some will no doubt avoid the empty places; others will shun the packed ones. It's a lame talking point.

[bil2054]

_{There are a number of sensible ways to handle the situation. The charge for overtime is reasonable as long as the policy is clearly stated and posted. Most places these days offer a receipt that is time and date stamped. so the charge can be accurately assessed.
The suggestion about politely moving folks along is also good, or suggesting it is time to order another latte', whatever.}

Edited July 21, 2015 by bil2054