Looks Like The ( Late Night ) Life Has Been Sucked Out Of CM

[Ulysses G.]

Is that for real? I have not been there for 20 years and Siam Reap sure did not look like that then.

[PostmanPat]

OK,its got bright lights at night in Pub Street, but its certainly taken good care of its historical sights ( Angkor Wat ) and despite your photograph there arent anywhere near the "Electronic Nightmares" that beset Chiang Mai these days !! I cant do it because I have my home and my partner here, but if I was free to choose right now I would pick Siem Reap 100 times out of a hundred!!

I know a couple of Internationally known artists and designers ( clothes etc) who have relocated their galleries from CM to Siem Reap in the past couple of years and they say that as a place to live its now well ahead of CM......and because of the French influence you can get great cheese and wine at a fraction of the price we pay!! ( eg Mouton Cadet Red, 1200 baht in Rimping, 320 baht in Siem Reap !!)

[piewarmer]

The old city of Chiang Mai (the sacred part of town they call it) used to be off limits for noisy bars and clubs, the police used to insist bars kept music to a whisper 24/7 and dropped by regularly to keep the bar owners aware of that. This was up to 8 years ago.

Times have changed since Zoe and co came along, The focus is now LK but don't be surprised if there's another wave inside the moat.

[Ulysses G.]

The old city of Chiang Mai (the sacred part of town they call it) used to be off limits for noisy bars and clubs, the police used to insist bars kept music to a whisper 24/7 and dropped by regularly to keep the bar owners aware of that.

Not for the last 25 years anyway. Cozy Corner was very happening place back in the day and that is only one example.

Edited September 1, 2015 by Ulysses G.

[Old people]

UNESCO World Heritage Status? Not a chance in hell. Compare Chiang Mai with both near neighbours Luang Prabang and Siem Reap. Both small towns where traffic and modernity have been kept at a discrete and respectful distance and level, and where there remains a quite serene and peaceful atmosphere.

Chiang Mai ?????????!!!!!!!!!!!! These days theres a giant video screen on almost every street corner and zero attempt to protect the inner/ old city from traffic intrusion. Now a city like Sukhothai, yes, thats the kind of place where World Heritage is appropriate, but Chiang Mai.....no way !!

"Yes i agree" Chiang Mai all the last 40 years that I have known it has always been a playground for the Bangkok men, and then the western man and now the Chinese couples and groups of women, it will never change it just has its ups and downs.

[SoiBiker]

Is that for real? I have not been there for 20 years and Siam Reap sure did not look like that then.

Yep. Siem Reap has changed a lot in recent years.

I like the place.

[thehelmsman]

Ha!

I have actually never, ever, been to a bar in Thailand, even though I have been in Thailand for over two years.

I do not see the point, really, since it all looks quite boring to me, and one just sits there and listens to people basically talk nonsense, while they drink and become ever more illogical by the minute.

Of course, I have been to bars in other countries in East Asia, China, America, HK, and a few other places, but I just have had no urge to walk into a bar in Chiang Mai, or any other Thailand city.

I must admit that it might be fun to go in for a beer and see what happens, except that I am afraid the risks might outweigh any possible entertainment value.

As far as women are concerned, I mean meeting them, I really think it is much better to meet women where one finds those who share ones interests, for example reading.

I think that there must be some really smart and interesting ladies in libraries around here, but I have not yet tried this either.

Actually, what I think that I would prefer is to just go to BKK and sample some really posh eateries, I mean the really good stuff, and then order a glass of wine, and see what happens if I might meet a really interesting chick or something.

I have not given it much thought, since I have been so busy, but maybe some time in the future I will get to go to a bar, or something.

If the risks include becoming uncontrollably drunk, then I'd say you have been making the correct decision.

[heybruce]

SIem Reap, serene and peaceful?

I'm guessing you haven't been there in quite a while.

I was there in 2001; only a few paved roads, a few small bars, and uncrowded Angkor temple ruins. I'm glad I went then.

[heybruce]

The old city of Chiang Mai (the sacred part of town they call it) used to be off limits for noisy bars and clubs, the police used to insist bars kept music to a whisper 24/7 and dropped by regularly to keep the bar owners aware of that. This was up to 8 years ago.

Times have changed since Zoe and co came along, The focus is now LK but don't be surprised if there's another wave inside the moat.

Really? In 2006 I recall bar owners staying open for as late as they had customers, and before Zoe the area was full of seedy bars with drug dealing going on in at least one of the bars.

[Chiengmaijoe]

The old city of Chiang Mai (the sacred part of town they call it) used to be off limits for noisy bars and clubs, the police used to insist bars kept music to a whisper 24/7 and dropped by regularly to keep the bar owners aware of that.

Not for the last 25 years anyway. Cozy Corner was very happening place back in the day and that is only one example.

Cut the guy some slack, he's practically a new-comer. Remember the original Linda's bar? How many years ago was that? The original John's place with the midget soaping down the girl in the shower was a good few years ago, too. All in the best possible taste, though.

[habfan]

The old city of Chiang Mai (the sacred part of town they call it) used to be off limits for noisy bars and clubs, the police used to insist bars kept music to a whisper 24/7 and dropped by regularly to keep the bar owners aware of that. This was up to 8 years ago.

Times have changed since Zoe and co came along, The focus is now LK but don't be surprised if there's another wave inside the moat.

If by "old city" you mean inside the square moat area we most be talking about 2 different cities?

When I first came in 2003 this area was home to many a "as long as you're drinkin we're open" bars and this was the case up to 2010 then they slowly started to clamp down.

[WinnieTheKhwai]

The old city of Chiang Mai (the sacred part of town they call it) used to be off limits for noisy bars and clubs, the police used to insist bars kept music to a whisper 24/7 and dropped by regularly to keep the bar owners aware of that. This was up to 8 years ago.

Times have changed since Zoe and co came along, The focus is now LK but don't be surprised if there's another wave inside the moat.

You guys (incl. Postman Pat, but for different reasons) are full of it.

The old town had a big club on Ratchadamnoen road in the mid 1990s. Also there was Mandalay in one guise or another, and the Anodard Hotel had their big "Kangsadan" club. I think Singharat Road had a big karaoke as well. And just off the moat were the infamous President hotel with various shady clubs, and of course Spicy (née Nice Illusion)

Although I do admit that the Zoe area (Boon Yoo) has added a lot of vibrance in recent times.

So I'm very much in the middle on this: Nightlife has always been there, scattered around in various places, however the 'old town' area within the moat has been effectively protected from high rise construction, and is actually looking a lot better now than it did decades ago. My mother has been visiting for 20 years or so and she even commented on it how much nicer everything looks compared to mostly dreary concrete boxes in need of a paint job in the old town. Right now a lot of the new (low-rise) construction is really nice, using a lot of traditional architecture elements.

And then there is the ridiculous notion that a site must be dead and frozen in a stone-age condition with muddy dirt roads and wooden shacks for it to qualify for wold heritage status. This never bothered Amsterdam, where the main red light district is smack in the middle of the old town and world heritage site.

For reference, this is what a DEAD heritage site looks like.

(Ankor Wat area)

And then this is what a similar city looks like, but a live one.

Edited September 2, 2015 by WinnieTheKhwai

[LivinLOS]

Very much agree that keeping a town vibrant and enjoyable is much more of an issue than preserving it in amber..

I do think the old city is not designed for, and being killed by, the massive traffic loads which are being placed on it.. I would be in support of a traffic charge system for everything 'inside' the moat including the ring road.. Add in the ideas of improved sensible clearly color coded song teows (I know a system does exist, but lets be honest, its far from clearly accessible) and adding in some kind of park and ride aspects..

Traffic is to my mind the cities number one problem and one which will get rapidly worse.. Something needs to be done before it reaches breaking point.

[LivinLOS]

http://www.chiangmaicitylife.com/news/police-check-if-bars-are-closed-near-universities/

[PostmanPat]

You guys (incl. Postman Pat, but for different reasons) are full of it.

What is it that you perceive I have said or done wrong, Winnie? I would have thought that you above most on here would agree with me that being sent home like naughty children at 11.45 by over zealous nanny state cops is not a good thing either for those who live here or those who visit on holiday?

[WinnieTheKhwai]

You guys (incl. Postman Pat, but for different reasons) are full of it.

What is it that you perceive I have said or done wrong, Winnie? I would have thought that you above most on here would agree with me that being sent home like naughty children at 11.45 by over zealous nanny state cops is not a good thing either for those who live here or those who visit on holiday?

Yes, yes; I do agree with you on that of course. Sorry for that drive-by comment without any reference, the parts I disagreed with were mostly on development vs conservation:

\UNESCO World Heritage Status? Not a chance in hell. [...] Chiang Mai ?????????!!!!!!!!!!!! These days theres a giant video screen on almost every street corner and zero attempt to protect the inner/ old city from traffic intrusion. Now a city like Sukhothai, yes, thats the kind of place where World Heritage is appropriate, but Chiang Mai.....no way !!

No argument on the LED screens, against which there is a lot of resistance also by Thai residents. On general development though, what I'm seeing is that because of the protection of the old city as well as general space limitations and high land prices, as well as the construction of big ring roads, this channels development away from central Chiang Mai: AIS used to have their main office right downtown at Thapae/Kamphaeng Din, attracting traffic. It's gone now. DTAC used to have a big office in a somewhat nice looking building on Ratchadamnoen Road, attracting traffic. It's gone now. Siam Commercial Bank had their main office on the corner of Chang Klan and Thapae Road. They moved out. Car Dealerships: some retain a branch in the old town but pretty much all of them have built really big dealerships on the ring roads and roads out of town. Also other 'general' trading businesses.. Denchai Trading, etc. And then Siam TV.. not quite in the same league as the previous as they're still on the moat, but they did move out of their location inside the old town area.

Overall though what I'm seeing is all major construction happening along the ring roads (as intended) and away form the old town. The biggest challenge seems actually Nimmanhaemin, but, "whatever": if people are hell-bent on creating a mini-Bangkok there with ridiculous traffic jams then much better to do it there than in the old town. The major boom downtown is in boutique hotels and similar operations; these by and large look MUCH nicer than a car dealership or telco office, and they don't attract too much traffic as they're tourism-focused, ans most tourists don't arrive by car.

But no argument on the main topic of not killing nightlife; this is indeed an important part of remaining attractive as a vibrant tourist destination.

[eaglesflight]

Not sure what you are hoping for. If you're not happy with a 1 or 2am close start drinking earlier, or hop on a plane and head down to Sukhumvhit Soi 11!

Oh terrific, so now if we want to have a sophisticated relaxed drink that happens to go a bit past midnight, we have to jump a plane and go to Bangkok? Since when and who decided that Chiang Mai ( and only Chiang Mai.....Phuket, Bangkok etc operating as normal til 3 or 4am !!) is now classed as a narrow minded old fashioned IS or Taliban state?

Great for encouraging ongoing tourism. As I said earlier in the thread, surrounding places which are challenging Chiang Mai in the World Tourism stakes such as Luang Prabang, Siem Reap, Yangon, Vietnam, all have a much more relaxed demeanour. If Chiang Mai continues like this, it will pay the price. People here now had already booked, but have no doubt, negative reports about the current state of things here will be filtering back to various countries as we speak!

Great for encouraging what, tourism? I don't think people visit Chiang Mai or not because of bars closing early. Tourists come for daytime pursuits like visiting temples, hill tribe villages and national parks.

I also don't recall Luang Prabang, Siem Reap or Yangon having a more "relaxed demeanour"with regards bar closing times. In all those places, except for karaoke lounges, doors close on time very quickly and not particularly later than in Chiang Mai.

Don't forget the studies that showed that alcoho- related accidents are reduced when bars close earlier. I'm sure CM roads would be safer without drunk drivers choosing to drive home in the early hours. If you want to have your quiet late night drink, why not do it at home on your balcony!

Have you actually read the summary of studies to which you linked? Many of them report 'no significant change' after opening hours were extended and for those that do report a significant change it is for the hours immediately after the new closing times. For example: when opening hours were extended from 1am to 2am somewhere in Canada, there were significantly more injuries in between 2am and 3am! I'm willing to bet that there was a correspondingly lower incidence of injuries in between 1am and 2am. And those were non-crash related injuries by the way so nothing to do with drunk drivers. In fact, there were less road accidents in between 11pm and 2am for that study, as you would expect because people were still in clubs and bars drinking, but no increase in crash related injuries between 2am and 3am when people were going home. Hardly supports your theory that CM roads would be safer if nobody was allowed to drink after midnight.

Edited September 2, 2015 by eaglesflight

[LivinLOS]

Have you actually read the summary of studies to which you linked? Many of them report 'no signifcant change' after opening hours were extended and for those that do report a significant change it is for the hours immediately after the new closing times. For example: when opening hours were extended from 1am to 2am somewhere in Canada, there were significantly more injuries in between 2am and 3am! I'm willing to bet that there was a correspondingly lower incidence of injuries in between 1am and 2am. Just take a look at who put that document together (Centre for Addictions Research of British Columbia / National Drug Research Institute, Curtin University, Perth, Australia) and what the purpose of it was - inclusion in a Crime Prevention and Community Safety publication - and I think you can safely conclude that it was not entirely objective from the outset.

I grew up in the uk and was young when pubs used to kick out at 11..

All evidence, anecdotally, police studies, private studies, etc etc concluded this resulted in far greater antisocial behaviour, binge drinking, flood of people to the streets, street violence, driving accidents, etc etc..

So much so those laws were all modified and relaxed.. now they allow much more flexibility in licensed hours and thats provided harm reduction.

simple fact.

[Chicog]

I grew up in the uk and was young when pubs used to kick out at 11..

All evidence, anecdotally, police studies, private studies, etc etc concluded this resulted in far greater antisocial behaviour, binge drinking, flood of people to the streets, street violence, driving accidents, etc etc..

So much so those laws were all modified and relaxed.. now they allow much more flexibility in licensed hours and thats provided harm reduction.

simple fact.

But in fairness flexibility in UK licensing laws is not dependent on how big a bribe you pay to the police.

[MartinBKK]

It's kind of pathetic that people can't remove their own preferences and lifestyle from the discussion. Personally, when I go out, I'm usually done by 10 pm. 3 big boys of Leo, and it's time to call it a night. However, I can understand that some people like to stay out later, and some people don't like to go out at all.

I think it is reasonable to say that regardless of your lifestyle choices, a society is best run through due process, rather than one person snapping their fingers and changing the rules on a whim. For example, I don't smoke. Do I think it should be illegal? No. Do I think it should be one person's decision, made over night, whether or not cigarettes should be legal or not? No. Do I think a legislative body should be able to weigh the pros and cons of the legality of smoking cigarettes. Sure. Where do the rest of you stand?

What a refreshing post :-) I completely agree

[Chicog]

It's kind of pathetic that people can't remove their own preferences and lifestyle from the discussion. Personally, when I go out, I'm usually done by 10 pm. 3 big boys of Leo, and it's time to call it a night. However, I can understand that some people like to stay out later, and some people don't like to go out at all.

I think it is reasonable to say that regardless of your lifestyle choices, a society is best run through due process, rather than one person snapping their fingers and changing the rules on a whim. For example, I don't smoke. Do I think it should be illegal? No. Do I think it should be one person's decision, made over night, whether or not cigarettes should be legal or not? No. Do I think a legislative body should be able to weigh the pros and cons of the legality of smoking cigarettes. Sure. Where do the rest of you stand?

What a refreshing post :-) I completely agree

It's an interesting point. What if you actually left places to decide when they want to open (as long as they are not causing a problem with, for example, noise or other infractions).

When they loosened the laws in England, there was not a mad rush from everyone trying to open late. It was people who saw it as a business opportunity.

So the industry in the UK as a whole can accommodate the lunchtime crowd, the evening drinkers or the night owls, but each business gets to choose what segment(s) of the market it wishes to serve.

If there was not a demand for post-midnight drinking, there would not be a supply.

While Thailand has a right to be wary of the consequences of alcohol abuse, and may wish to curb underage drinking, closing bars early is not the solution. Enforcing existing laws is.

And if you are a policeman whose bribe is dependent on a bar opening late and having lots of customers, you are probably not going to enforce any law, are you?

Edited September 2, 2015 by Chicog

[piewarmer]

The old city of Chiang Mai (the sacred part of town they call it) used to be off limits for noisy bars and clubs, the police used to insist bars kept music to a whisper 24/7 and dropped by regularly to keep the bar owners aware of that. This was up to 8 years ago.

Times have changed since Zoe and co came along, The focus is now LK but don't be surprised if there's another wave inside the moat.

Really? In 2006 I recall bar owners staying open for as late as they had customers, and before Zoe the area was full of seedy bars with drug dealing going on in at least one of the bars.

I used to drink in the Tiger bar on Ratchamanka off Moon Muang in 2007, Ray had a pissy little stereo which was the max allowed by the local BIB. He told me about the noise restrictions which amounted to being inaudible from the street. The lucky ones had set-up outside the moat. Of course there were exceptions but this was the instructions from above.

Today there are many bars unable to sell beer from 2-5pm but still many others still doing so. same same but different.

[heybruce]

The old city of Chiang Mai (the sacred part of town they call it) used to be off limits for noisy bars and clubs, the police used to insist bars kept music to a whisper 24/7 and dropped by regularly to keep the bar owners aware of that. This was up to 8 years ago.

Times have changed since Zoe and co came along, The focus is now LK but don't be surprised if there's another wave inside the moat.

Really? In 2006 I recall bar owners staying open for as late as they had customers, and before Zoe the area was full of seedy bars with drug dealing going on in at least one of the bars.

I used to drink in the Tiger bar on Ratchamanka off Moon Muang in 2007, Ray had a pissy little stereo which was the max allowed by the local BIB. He told me about the noise restrictions which amounted to being inaudible from the street. The lucky ones had set-up outside the moat. Of course there were exceptions but this was the instructions from above.

Today there are many bars unable to sell beer from 2-5pm but still many others still doing so. same same but different.

You made you claims about past restrictions in the old city based on your experience with one bar in the southeast part?

Did you ever go to the Zoe area when it was known as the Heaven Beach area? There was less dancing and more drugs back then. Arguably neither are suitable for a "sacred part of town", but I'd rather the young people dance than get hooked on whatever comes across the border from Burma.

[bangmai]

I doubt the youngsters would be drinking Deet and cleaning solvents if the penalties for weed weren't so harsh.

[TheAppletons]

I doubt the youngsters would be drinking Deet and cleaning solvents if the penalties for weed weren't so harsh.

I thought bath salts were all the rage now.

[bangmai]

I doubt the youngsters would be drinking Deet and cleaning solvents if the penalties for weed weren't so harsh.

I thought bath salts were all the rage now.

put them in a sub-category under cleaning solvents.

[heybruce]

I doubt the youngsters would be drinking Deet and cleaning solvents if the penalties for weed weren't so harsh.

I thought bath salts were all the rage now.

put them in a sub-category under cleaning solvents.

I am definitely out of touch with the drug scene. However since I have no desire to consume Deet or cleaning solvents I don't mind.

[Chicog]

Before anyone else misunderstands, "Bath Salts" in the context of recreational chemicals are not, well, Bath Salts.

Bath salts is a term used in North America to describe a number of recreational designer drugs. The name derives from instances in which the drugs have been sold disguised as true bath salts. The white powder, granules, or crystals often resemble true bath salts such as Epsom salts, but are very different chemically. The drugs' packaging often states "not for human consumption" in an attempt to circumvent drug prohibition laws.

[WinnieTheKhwai]

Weird.

Can we get back to booze and hookers nightlife please?

Edited September 3, 2015 by WinnieTheKhwai

[northernjohn]

Weird.

Can we get back to booze and hookers nightlife please?

I was waiting for your view on the subject. The one thing I have noticed is you are always right on the scene when

alcohol is mentioned. I Was kind of hoping to see what was happening been away for a while. I don't need the stuff but I do have friends who use it. Besides I am curious to see what the new government is doing.

Edit

I forgot to mention I have a wife don't need more.

Edited September 3, 2015 by northernjohn