Thai man massively overcharged at national park because he looks like a farang

[JAG]

Yes, went to the tropical gardens near Pattaya the other day. Wife and Sister in Law were furious that I and my daughter ( who is Thai but looks European) were charged B500 and B250 each, whilst they and Sister in Laws children were charged B150 and B75 respectively.

After a big row, watched with interest by all around he relented and charged my daughter B75. I still had to pay B500.

My family and interestingly most of those around seemed to think the "Falang price " was unfair. A couple of bystanders chipped in with supportive comments.

Edited October 19, 2015 by JAG

[Loeilad]

I notice a national park offering 50% discount on camping until December.

[nontabury]

Yes, went to the tropical gardens near Pattaya the other day. Wife and Sister in Law were furious that I and my daughter ( who is Thai but looks European) were charged B500 and B250 each, whilst they and Sister in Laws children were charged B150 and B75 respectively.

After a big row, watched with interest by all around he relented and charged my daughter B75. I still had to pay B500.

My family and interestingly most of those around seemed to think the "Falang price " was unfair. A couple of bystanders chipped in with supportive comments.

That would't be Nong Nuooch , as mentioned in post 444 and 448 ?

However your daughter only received the Thai price due to her being Thai, but for some reason you were still discriminated against,I wonder why.

Nice to hear that you were supported by Thai's including your wife and SIL's though I have a feeling that if some Farangs had have been there, they would have told you to shut up and not point out this discrimination.

Edited October 19, 2015 by nontabury

[Soutpeel]

discriminatory pricing is not a big deal. Even in the states when it comes to hunting or fishing states charge much more for somone comeing from another state. It's a valid economic model that actually works quite well. There are other things the thai tourism authority should be worried abou. The world is a different place and people with money generally are not stupid and very connected. The old guys who dont use social media or understand the power of information at their finger tips are dying out. Too much bad press and rest assured their money will be sent elsewhere.

Discriminatory pricing no big deal, so if a black man was charged more in your country would you still say "no big deal" ?

To day my Thai family of 10 people including my Thai wife and two children wanted to visit Nung Nut botanicals garden. Knowing of the blatant discrimination at some attractions, my wife rang them up to ask would I as a Farang be charged more than the rest of the family, at first they said Yes, she then told them that this is wrong, explaining to them that I a Farang have two eyes two legs and two arms the same as a Thai. They then relented and agreed to allow me access on production of a Thai driving licence proving I am a resident of Thailand.

Interestingly later my eldest,10yrs ( half Thai) said that he does not like his dad being discriminated against because he is not Thai and could we leave Thailand and go and live in the UK.

So it shows Lukasisgood that even some children recognise discrimination.

That's illegal here, but the differences in prices are probably because in general forigners can aford more. I don't like it that it costs 4 times more to purchase a hunting tag for Idaho but it's well Understood that hunters that travel can aford abd will pay more. I have a degree in economics and discriminatory pricing is a term that is used without the racial connotations. In general it's better for an economic system if suppliers can charge more for those willing and able to pay more.

I'm sure there is real racial issues there, but the pricing differences are there for a reason. If the point of unitary price elasticity made them less money when they increased the price for forigners, they wouldnt do it. Without the economic jargon it means they charge more because farang will pay it. If they diddnt they wouldnt do it. So blame the farang not the thai.

Absolutely right. Discriminatory pricing in the case of park entrance is a business decision and I wish others would stop trying to connect it to racism. Tourism is a business, the park is a product, and Thailand is maximising it's revenue.

I believe most tourists don't have a problem with the pricing because even though they pay 10 times more it's still easily affordable. And whinging hypocritical expats only seem to have a problem with dual pricing when they're refused a discount.

The National parks no longer allow entry with a driving license, what has happened is that some private businesses have tagged on in order to increase profit. Yet when they are confronted with the realization that this may result in lost profit, the smart ones will relent. The national parks policy is based on race as I showed in a earlier post regarding Koreans gaining entry to the Emerald pool.

As for Southpeels post mentioning why my Thai wife deemed it necessary to ring up the attraction and ask what their policy is. She did it for a very simply reason. We do live some distance from that attraction and she did not want us to make a wasted journey, as she herself is not willing to enter such an establishment that discriminates against her husband. She KNOWS that it is based on race, and she is very ashamed of her country for allowing it. Which just goes to show that some Thais can think for themselves and ask the question "why".

So if its based on race to get into Nong Nooch how did you get in on a Thai DL then ?

If it was based on race, your a whitey so they wouldnt let you in whether you had a DL or not.....you, yourself and Nong Nooch confirmed per your previous post that entry was based on perceived residence

[Soutpeel]

Yes, went to the tropical gardens near Pattaya the other day. Wife and Sister in Law were furious that I and my daughter ( who is Thai but looks European) were charged B500 and B250 each, whilst they and Sister in Laws children were charged B150 and B75 respectively.

After a big row, watched with interest by all around he relented and charged my daughter B75. I still had to pay B500.

My family and interestingly most of those around seemed to think the "Falang price " was unfair. A couple of bystanders chipped in with supportive comments.

That would't be Nong Nuooch , as mentioned in post 444 and 448 ?

However your daughter only received the Thai price due to her being Thai, but for some reason you were still discriminated against,I wonder why.

Nice to hear that you were supported by Thai's including your wife and SIL's though I have a feeling that if some Farangs had have been there, they would have told you to shut up and not point out this discrimination.

If he is talking about Nong Nooch...i was there over the few days with the extended family and got in for the Thai price by producing a Thai DL ....so i am wondering why as well

[Loeilad]

Firstly let me say that I think the dual charging system for foreigners is a disgrace....secondly what is almost as a big a disgrace is the buffoons who cry "racism" and think this is either true or a valid argument against dual charging; you are barking up the wrong tree, your protestations are grossly ignorant add nothing to the argument and will, if anything, get in the way of finding a solution.

The system of dual charging comes from a long (mistakenly) held idea that Thailand is very poor compared to the rich "west" and therefore it is OK to charge foreign visitors extra to maintain theses "attractions"......

Of course, this actually is a false premise and very little money if any at all goes to improving things like National Parks - in fact on a world scale systems of dual pricing are shown usually to be ineffective.

Those who cite other countries dual charging are usually just comparing apples and oranges and again this is not a valid argument and in no way counters of mitigated the situation.

What is needed is for a serious critique of the dual charges to be made. Not a nape-of-the-neck response by some ill-qualified, uninformed government clerk...it needs to be an in-depth piece of research carried out by an INDEPENDENT body who can present their findings to both government and tourist in=dustries as well as other interested parties.

To change the attitude of successive governments, a serious report will be needed, even though I'm pretty sure that it will become clear that the overall effect of this charges will be found firstly to have a negative effect on the countries reputation, negative effect on tourist satisfaction and no effect whatsoever on the finances of those operating dual charging, I believe the only way will be a proper scientific review.

[ttthailand]

The answer is to not go to these places. We know that national parks charge 10 times the price but there should be a list of all other places charging extra. Some entertainment venues also have different prices for different people as they follow the government. These same entertainment places charging us higher prices however charge very low prices to the Chinese tours. They sometimes pay half or less of the normal Thai price. Perhaps if we stop going things will change. Only problem is tourists don't know and will pay anyhow.

I have already told my gf that I don't go to national parks due to this so she doesn't ask now. Her family are the ones who loose out as I am normally the person who drives.They can thank their government.

Foreigners pay to fly here, pay for visa, pay for airport arrival, pay for taxis from hotel, pay for hotel, pay for meals, etc etc .... They pay 7% VAT and many times 10% service. You would think they have already paid more tax than most Thais in just staying for two weeks. For the government to charge more is just wrong but when did doing something wrong stop this country.

[Loeilad]

The answer is to not go to these places. We know that national parks charge 10 times the price but there should be a list of all other places charging extra. Some entertainment venues also have different prices for different people as they follow the government. These same entertainment places charging us higher prices however charge very low prices to the Chinese tours. They sometimes pay half or less of the normal Thai price. Perhaps if we stop going things will change. Only problem is tourists don't know and will pay anyhow.

I have already told my gf that I don't go to national parks due to this so she doesn't ask now. Her family are the ones who loose out as I am normally the person who drives.They can thank their government.

Foreigners pay to fly here, pay for visa, pay for airport arrival, pay for taxis from hotel, pay for hotel, pay for meals, etc etc .... They pay 7% VAT and many times 10% service. You would think they have already paid more tax than most Thais in just staying for two weeks. For the government to charge more is just wrong but when did doing something wrong stop this country.

all I can say to that is "more fool you!"

I WANT to see Thailand, if you just want to sit in a bar on a beach and pay way more for your food and drink than the locals, then that's up to you.

But why not do what the Chinese are doing - according to you - BARGAIN - if we had the support of our governments and tourism associations then it is possible the system might change.

....but not going to some of the most beautiful places in Thailand just because they overcharge is not something I'm prepared to do. I won't cut off my nose to spite my face (or my relatives)....

In the end many of Thais natural resources away from the beaches remain under-appreciated by foreign visitors and consequently under-funded; charging the few that do go extra won't make a difference, uyntil a seas-change occurs, they remain a resource that is ignored - not by boycotters - but simply because of mismanagement by the Thai authorities who basically should take a look at Australia or the States or other European countries and see how these sort of places can be both conserved and appreciated with proper management in a way that makes money by bringing in tourists.

[KamalaRider]

discriminatory pricing is not a big deal. Even in the states when it comes to hunting or fishing states charge much more for somone comeing from another state. It's a valid economic model that actually works quite well. There are other things the thai tourism authority should be worried abou. The world is a different place and people with money generally are not stupid and very connected. The old guys who dont use social media or understand the power of information at their finger tips are dying out. Too much bad press and rest assured their money will be sent elsewhere.

Discriminatory pricing no big deal, so if a black man was charged more in your country would you still say "no big deal" ?

To day my Thai family of 10 people including my Thai wife and two children wanted to visit Nung Nut botanicals garden. Knowing of the blatant discrimination at some attractions, my wife rang them up to ask would I as a Farang be charged more than the rest of the family, at first they said Yes, she then told them that this is wrong, explaining to them that I a Farang have two eyes two legs and two arms the same as a Thai. They then relented and agreed to allow me access on production of a Thai driving licence proving I am a resident of Thailand.

Interestingly later my eldest,10yrs ( half Thai) said that he does not like his dad being discriminated against because he is not Thai and could we leave Thailand and go and live in the UK.

So it shows Lukasisgood that even some children recognise discrimination.

That's illegal here, but the differences in prices are probably because in general forigners can aford more. I don't like it that it costs 4 times more to purchase a hunting tag for Idaho but it's well Understood that hunters that travel can aford abd will pay more. I have a degree in economics and discriminatory pricing is a term that is used without the racial connotations. In general it's better for an economic system if suppliers can charge more for those willing and able to pay more.

I'm sure there is real racial issues there, but the pricing differences are there for a reason. If the point of unitary price elasticity made them less money when they increased the price for forigners, they wouldnt do it. Without the economic jargon it means they charge more because farang will pay it. If they diddnt they wouldnt do it. So blame the farang not the thai.

Absolutely right. Discriminatory pricing in the case of park entrance is a business decision and I wish others would stop trying to connect it to racism. Tourism is a business, the park is a product, and Thailand is maximising it's revenue.

I believe most tourists don't have a problem with the pricing because even though they pay 10 times more it's still easily affordable. And whinging hypocritical expats only seem to have a problem with dual pricing when they're refused a discount.

According to your logic, Thais can never be tourists in their own country.

[elviajero]

Discriminatory pricing no big deal, so if a black man was charged more in your country would you still say "no big deal" ?

To day my Thai family of 10 people including my Thai wife and two children wanted to visit Nung Nut botanicals garden. Knowing of the blatant discrimination at some attractions, my wife rang them up to ask would I as a Farang be charged more than the rest of the family, at first they said Yes, she then told them that this is wrong, explaining to them that I a Farang have two eyes two legs and two arms the same as a Thai. They then relented and agreed to allow me access on production of a Thai driving licence proving I am a resident of Thailand.

Interestingly later my eldest,10yrs ( half Thai) said that he does not like his dad being discriminated against because he is not Thai and could we leave Thailand and go and live in the UK.

So it shows Lukasisgood that even some children recognise discrimination.

That's illegal here, but the differences in prices are probably because in general forigners can aford more. I don't like it that it costs 4 times more to purchase a hunting tag for Idaho but it's well Understood that hunters that travel can aford abd will pay more. I have a degree in economics and discriminatory pricing is a term that is used without the racial connotations. In general it's better for an economic system if suppliers can charge more for those willing and able to pay more.

I'm sure there is real racial issues there, but the pricing differences are there for a reason. If the point of unitary price elasticity made them less money when they increased the price for forigners, they wouldnt do it. Without the economic jargon it means they charge more because farang will pay it. If they diddnt they wouldnt do it. So blame the farang not the thai.

Absolutely right. Discriminatory pricing in the case of park entrance is a business decision and I wish others would stop trying to connect it to racism. Tourism is a business, the park is a product, and Thailand is maximising it's revenue.

I believe most tourists don't have a problem with the pricing because even though they pay 10 times more it's still easily affordable. And whinging hypocritical expats only seem to have a problem with dual pricing when they're refused a discount.

The National parks no longer allow entry with a driving license, what has happened is that some private businesses have tagged on in order to increase profit. Yet when they are confronted with the realization that this may result in lost profit, the smart ones will relent. The national parks policy is based on race as I showed in a earlier post regarding Koreans gaining entry to the Emerald pool.

As for Southpeels post mentioning why my Thai wife deemed it necessary to ring up the attraction and ask what their policy is. She did it for a very simply reason. We do live some distance from that attraction and she did not want us to make a wasted journey, as she herself is not willing to enter such an establishment that discriminates against her husband. She KNOWS that it is based on race, and she is very ashamed of her country for allowing it. Which just goes to show that some Thais can think for themselves and ask the question "why".

Or brainwashed by their farang husband who's willing to drive some distance and enter for the Thai price that he doesn't qualify for, but claims racial discrimination when he has to pay the correct price based on nationality.

Ironically you and others condone discrimination when accepting the DL discount, which discriminates against are the foreigners that don't have a DL. Driving licence discrimination. They should be ashamed.

Edited October 19, 2015 by elviajero

[elviajero]

Absolutely right. Discriminatory pricing in the case of park entrance is a business decision and I wish others would stop trying to connect it to racism. Tourism is a business, the park is a product, and Thailand is maximising it's revenue.

I believe most tourists don't have a problem with the pricing because even though they pay 10 times more it's still easily affordable. And whinging hypocritical expats only seem to have a problem with dual pricing when they're refused a discount.

According to your logic, Thais can never be tourists in their own country.

How does your logic figure that!

[Loeilad]

discriminatory pricing is not a big deal. Even in the states when it comes to hunting or fishing states charge much more for somone comeing from another state. It's a valid economic model that actually works quite well. There are other things the thai tourism authority should be worried abou. The world is a different place and people with money generally are not stupid and very connected. The old guys who dont use social media or understand the power of information at their finger tips are dying out. Too much bad press and rest assured their money will be sent elsewhere.

Discriminatory pricing no big deal, so if a black man was charged more in your country would you still say "no big deal" ?

To day my Thai family of 10 people including my Thai wife and two children wanted to visit Nung Nut botanicals garden. Knowing of the blatant discrimination at some attractions, my wife rang them up to ask would I as a Farang be charged more than the rest of the family, at first they said Yes, she then told them that this is wrong, explaining to them that I a Farang have two eyes two legs and two arms the same as a Thai. They then relented and agreed to allow me access on production of a Thai driving licence proving I am a resident of Thailand.

Interestingly later my eldest,10yrs ( half Thai) said that he does not like his dad being discriminated against because he is not Thai and could we leave Thailand and go and live in the UK.

So it shows Lukasisgood that even some children recognise discrimination.

That's illegal here, but the differences in prices are probably because in general forigners can aford more. I don't like it that it costs 4 times more to purchase a hunting tag for Idaho but it's well Understood that hunters that travel can aford abd will pay more. I have a degree in economics and discriminatory pricing is a term that is used without the racial connotations. In general it's better for an economic system if suppliers can charge more for those willing and able to pay more.

I'm sure there is real racial issues there, but the pricing differences are there for a reason. If the point of unitary price elasticity made them less money when they increased the price for forigners, they wouldnt do it. Without the economic jargon it means they charge more because farang will pay it. If they diddnt they wouldnt do it. So blame the farang not the thai.

Absolutely right. Discriminatory pricing in the case of park entrance is a business decision and I wish others would stop trying to connect it to racism. Tourism is a business, the park is a product, and Thailand is maximising it's revenue.

I believe most tourists don't have a problem with the pricing because even though they pay 10 times more it's still easily affordable. And whinging hypocritical expats only seem to have a problem with dual pricing when they're refused a discount.

"Tourism is a business, the park is a product, and Thailand is maximising its revenue." - except that it isn't achieving that. What research has shown is that the income of NPs does not improve when charging grossly inflated prices to any particular category of visitor.

Around the world, there are many examples of higher pricing for "non-locals", BUT FEW WITH SUCH EXTREME DIFFERENTIATION.

Another point is that elsewhere, this differentiation in many cases is not "extra" for outsiders but a discount for the locals who live and work in the region.

the Thai model is emphatically NOT a sound economic model it is a knee-jerk response to some ill-conceived suppositions by ill-informed politicians and civil servants wit a baseless and blinkered perception of what is really going on.

[Soutpeel]

Discriminatory pricing no big deal, so if a black man was charged more in your country would you still say "no big deal" ?

To day my Thai family of 10 people including my Thai wife and two children wanted to visit Nung Nut botanicals garden. Knowing of the blatant discrimination at some attractions, my wife rang them up to ask would I as a Farang be charged more than the rest of the family, at first they said Yes, she then told them that this is wrong, explaining to them that I a Farang have two eyes two legs and two arms the same as a Thai. They then relented and agreed to allow me access on production of a Thai driving licence proving I am a resident of Thailand.

Interestingly later my eldest,10yrs ( half Thai) said that he does not like his dad being discriminated against because he is not Thai and could we leave Thailand and go and live in the UK.

So it shows Lukasisgood that even some children recognise discrimination.

That's illegal here, but the differences in prices are probably because in general forigners can aford more. I don't like it that it costs 4 times more to purchase a hunting tag for Idaho but it's well Understood that hunters that travel can aford abd will pay more. I have a degree in economics and discriminatory pricing is a term that is used without the racial connotations. In general it's better for an economic system if suppliers can charge more for those willing and able to pay more.

I'm sure there is real racial issues there, but the pricing differences are there for a reason. If the point of unitary price elasticity made them less money when they increased the price for forigners, they wouldnt do it. Without the economic jargon it means they charge more because farang will pay it. If they diddnt they wouldnt do it. So blame the farang not the thai.

Absolutely right. Discriminatory pricing in the case of park entrance is a business decision and I wish others would stop trying to connect it to racism. Tourism is a business, the park is a product, and Thailand is maximising it's revenue.

I believe most tourists don't have a problem with the pricing because even though they pay 10 times more it's still easily affordable. And whinging hypocritical expats only seem to have a problem with dual pricing when they're refused a discount.

The National parks no longer allow entry with a driving license, what has happened is that some private businesses have tagged on in order to increase profit. Yet when they are confronted with the realization that this may result in lost profit, the smart ones will relent. The national parks policy is based on race as I showed in a earlier post regarding Koreans gaining entry to the Emerald pool.

As for Southpeels post mentioning why my Thai wife deemed it necessary to ring up the attraction and ask what their policy is. She did it for a very simply reason. We do live some distance from that attraction and she did not want us to make a wasted journey, as she herself is not willing to enter such an establishment that discriminates against her husband. She KNOWS that it is based on race, and she is very ashamed of her country for allowing it. Which just goes to show that some Thais can think for themselves and ask the question "why".

Or brainwashed by their farang husband who's willing to drive some distance and enter for the Thai price that he doesn't qualify for, but claims racial discrimination when he has to pay the correct price based on nationality.

Ironically you and others condone discrimination when accepting the DL discount, which discriminates against are the foreigners that don't have a DL. Driving licence discrimination. They should be ashamed.

In reality it seems the pricing Thai/toursit thing is based on perceived residence therefore strictly speaking none of us should get in on the basis of a DL only as very few are legal residents in Thailand ie having Permanent Residence

I could see an argument for allowing WP holders "thai" rates given they are paying income tax in Thailand and need to produce their WP, which has happened to me a couple of times in some places the DL they wouldnt accept but said if i showed a WP i would be allowed in at Thai prices which i did and was allowed in....they never no cannot cos i am whitey

[elviajero]

Absolutely right. Discriminatory pricing in the case of park entrance is a business decision and I wish others would stop trying to connect it to racism. Tourism is a business, the park is a product, and Thailand is maximising it's revenue.

I believe most tourists don't have a problem with the pricing because even though they pay 10 times more it's still easily affordable. And whinging hypocritical expats only seem to have a problem with dual pricing when they're refused a discount.

"Tourism is a business, the park is a product, and Thailand is maximising its revenue." - except that it isn't achieving that. What research has shown is that the income of NPs does not improve when charging grossly inflated prices to any particular category of visitor.

Around the world, there are many examples of higher pricing for "non-locals", BUT FEW WITH SUCH EXTREME DIFFERENTIATION.

Another point is that elsewhere, this differentiation in many cases is not "extra" for outsiders but a discount for the locals who live and work in the region.

the Thai model is emphatically NOT a sound economic model it is a knee-jerk response to some ill-conceived suppositions by ill-informed politicians and civil servants wit a baseless and blinkered perception of what is really going on.

I accept that overpricing could be self defeating but not dual pricing. Even if a foreigner pays 10 times as much as the local, at 200 baht it's still easily affordable for most foreign tourists and expats. I'm sure many tourists would be happy to pay extra to support the park.

Extra or discount it's the same result and just about marketing. I agree that it would be better PR to set the rate and give Thais a discount.

Dual pricing has gone on here for years and yet tourists still visit. I think the increase from 20/200 to 40/400 is possibly a mistake, but as long as they get at least 50% of the current visitor numbers they won't lose out.

[JAG]

Yes, went to the tropical gardens near Pattaya the other day. Wife and Sister in Law were furious that I and my daughter ( who is Thai but looks European) were charged B500 and B250 each, whilst they and Sister in Laws children were charged B150 and B75 respectively.

After a big row, watched with interest by all around he relented and charged my daughter B75. I still had to pay B500.

My family and interestingly most of those around seemed to think the "Falang price " was unfair. A couple of bystanders chipped in with supportive comments.

That would't be Nong Nuooch , as mentioned in post 444 and 448 ?

However your daughter only received the Thai price due to her being Thai, but for some reason you were still discriminated against,I wonder why.

Nice to hear that you were supported by Thai's including your wife and SIL's though I have a feeling that if some Farangs had have been there, they would have told you to shut up and not point out this discrimination.

Yes it was Nong No och. I wasn't carrying my Driving License.

To answer ( perhaps ) some of the others who have commented, it was Thais rather than me who were arguing against the dual pricing. I realised I was silly not to have brought my DL with me, a point that was subsequently made quite forcibly by " Best Beloved".

[Loeilad]

Absolutely right. Discriminatory pricing in the case of park entrance is a business decision and I wish others would stop trying to connect it to racism. Tourism is a business, the park is a product, and Thailand is maximising it's revenue.

I believe most tourists don't have a problem with the pricing because even though they pay 10 times more it's still easily affordable. And whinging hypocritical expats only seem to have a problem with dual pricing when they're refused a discount.

"Tourism is a business, the park is a product, and Thailand is maximising its revenue." - except that it isn't achieving that. What research has shown is that the income of NPs does not improve when charging grossly inflated prices to any particular category of visitor.

Around the world, there are many examples of higher pricing for "non-locals", BUT FEW WITH SUCH EXTREME DIFFERENTIATION.

Another point is that elsewhere, this differentiation in many cases is not "extra" for outsiders but a discount for the locals who live and work in the region.

the Thai model is emphatically NOT a sound economic model it is a knee-jerk response to some ill-conceived suppositions by ill-informed politicians and civil servants wit a baseless and blinkered perception of what is really going on.

I accept that overpricing could be self defeating but not dual pricing. Even if a foreigner pays 10 times as much as the local, at 200 baht it's still easily affordable for most foreign tourists and expats. I'm sure many tourists would be happy to pay extra to support the park.

Extra or discount it's the same result and just about marketing. I agree that it would be better PR to set the rate and give Thais a discount.

Dual pricing has gone on here for years and yet tourists still visit. I think the increase from 20/200 to 40/400 is possibly a mistake, but as long as they get at least 50% of the current visitor numbers they won't lose out.

There is a study on Thai NPs that shows that dual pricing does not generate extra income and can actually deter visitors......this is in common with experiences around the world.

Actually Thailand is not a cheap place and those who want to spend time in NPs can easily find it more expensive than staying in beach resort hotels....generalisations about who can or cannot afford to pay are not helpful....a proper management of NOPs will help not just tourism and Thailand's international image, it will help to conserve what is left of Thailand's unique natural resources...the policy is not just a financial farce, it is also an eco-disaster.

[nontabury]

The answer is to not go to these places. We know that national parks charge 10 times the price but there should be a list of all other places charging extra. Some entertainment venues also have different prices for different people as they follow the government. These same entertainment places charging us higher prices however charge very low prices to the Chinese tours. They sometimes pay half or less of the normal Thai price. Perhaps if we stop going things will change. Only problem is tourists don't know and will pay anyhow.

I have already told my gf that I don't go to national parks due to this so she doesn't ask now. Her family are the ones who loose out as I am normally the person who drives.They can thank their government.

Foreigners pay to fly here, pay for visa, pay for airport arrival, pay for taxis from hotel, pay for hotel, pay for meals, etc etc .... They pay 7% VAT and many times 10% service. You would think they have already paid more tax than most Thais in just staying for two weeks. For the government to charge more is just wrong but when did doing something wrong stop this country.

all I can say to that is "more fool you!"

I WANT to see Thailand, if you just want to sit in a bar on a beach and pay way more for your food and drink than the locals, then that's up to you.

But why not do what the Chinese are doing - according to you - BARGAIN - if we had the support of our governments and tourism associations then it is possible the system might change.

....but not going to some of the most beautiful places in Thailand just because they overcharge is not something I'm prepared to do. I won't cut off my nose to spite my face (or my relatives)....

In the end many of Thais natural resources away from the beaches remain under-appreciated by foreign visitors and consequently under-funded; charging the few that do go extra won't make a difference, uyntil a seas-change occurs, they remain a resource that is ignored - not by boycotters - but simply because of mismanagement by the Thai authorities who basically should take a look at Australia or the States or other European countries and see how these sort of places can be both conserved and appreciated with proper management in a way that makes money by bringing in tourists.

Agree with most of what you write, though would just add

" A fool and his money are soon parted"

[nontabury]

Discriminatory pricing no big deal, so if a black man was charged more in your country would you still say "no big deal" ?

To day my Thai family of 10 people including my Thai wife and two children wanted to visit Nung Nut botanicals garden. Knowing of the blatant discrimination at some attractions, my wife rang them up to ask would I as a Farang be charged more than the rest of the family, at first they said Yes, she then told them that this is wrong, explaining to them that I a Farang have two eyes two legs and two arms the same as a Thai. They then relented and agreed to allow me access on production of a Thai driving licence proving I am a resident of Thailand.

Interestingly later my eldest,10yrs ( half Thai) said that he does not like his dad being discriminated against because he is not Thai and could we leave Thailand and go and live in the UK.

So it shows Lukasisgood that even some children recognise discrimination.

That's illegal here, but the differences in prices are probably because in general forigners can aford more. I don't like it that it costs 4 times more to purchase a hunting tag for Idaho but it's well Understood that hunters that travel can aford abd will pay more. I have a degree in economics and discriminatory pricing is a term that is used without the racial connotations. In general it's better for an economic system if suppliers can charge more for those willing and able to pay more.

I'm sure there is real racial issues there, but the pricing differences are there for a reason. If the point of unitary price elasticity made them less money when they increased the price for forigners, they wouldnt do it. Without the economic jargon it means they charge more because farang will pay it. If they diddnt they wouldnt do it. So blame the farang not the thai.

Absolutely right. Discriminatory pricing in the case of park entrance is a business decision and I wish others would stop trying to connect it to racism. Tourism is a business, the park is a product, and Thailand is maximising it's revenue.

I believe most tourists don't have a problem with the pricing because even though they pay 10 times more it's still easily affordable. And whinging hypocritical expats only seem to have a problem with dual pricing when they're refused a discount.

The National parks no longer allow entry with a driving license, what has happened is that some private businesses have tagged on in order to increase profit. Yet when they are confronted with the realization that this may result in lost profit, the smart ones will relent. The national parks policy is based on race as I showed in a earlier post regarding Koreans gaining entry to the Emerald pool.

As for Southpeels post mentioning why my Thai wife deemed it necessary to ring up the attraction and ask what their policy is. She did it for a very simply reason. We do live some distance from that attraction and she did not want us to make a wasted journey, as she herself is not willing to enter such an establishment that discriminates against her husband. She KNOWS that it is based on race, and she is very ashamed of her country for allowing it. Which just goes to show that some Thais can think for themselves and ask the question "why".

Or brainwashed by their farang husband who's willing to drive some distance and enter for the Thai price that he doesn't qualify for, but claims racial discrimination when he has to pay the correct price based on nationality.

Ironically you and others condone discrimination when accepting the DL discount, which discriminates against are the foreigners that don't have a DL. Driving licence discrimination. They should be ashamed.

In reality it seems the pricing Thai/toursit thing is based on perceived residence therefore strictly speaking none of us should get in on the basis of a DL only as very few are legal residents in Thailand ie having Permanent Residence

I could see an argument for allowing WP holders "thai" rates given they are paying income tax in Thailand and need to produce their WP, which has happened to me a couple of times in some places the DL they wouldnt accept but said if i showed a WP i would be allowed in at Thai prices which i did and was allowed in....they never no cannot cos i am whitey

Slightly off topic, but how much income would a Farang have to earn, in order to be liable for income tax, and at what rate?

[Soutpeel]

Discriminatory pricing no big deal, so if a black man was charged more in your country would you still say "no big deal" ?

To day my Thai family of 10 people including my Thai wife and two children wanted to visit Nung Nut botanicals garden. Knowing of the blatant discrimination at some attractions, my wife rang them up to ask would I as a Farang be charged more than the rest of the family, at first they said Yes, she then told them that this is wrong, explaining to them that I a Farang have two eyes two legs and two arms the same as a Thai. They then relented and agreed to allow me access on production of a Thai driving licence proving I am a resident of Thailand.

Interestingly later my eldest,10yrs ( half Thai) said that he does not like his dad being discriminated against because he is not Thai and could we leave Thailand and go and live in the UK.

So it shows Lukasisgood that even some children recognise discrimination.

That's illegal here, but the differences in prices are probably because in general forigners can aford more. I don't like it that it costs 4 times more to purchase a hunting tag for Idaho but it's well Understood that hunters that travel can aford abd will pay more. I have a degree in economics and discriminatory pricing is a term that is used without the racial connotations. In general it's better for an economic system if suppliers can charge more for those willing and able to pay more.

I'm sure there is real racial issues there, but the pricing differences are there for a reason. If the point of unitary price elasticity made them less money when they increased the price for forigners, they wouldnt do it. Without the economic jargon it means they charge more because farang will pay it. If they diddnt they wouldnt do it. So blame the farang not the thai.

Absolutely right. Discriminatory pricing in the case of park entrance is a business decision and I wish others would stop trying to connect it to racism. Tourism is a business, the park is a product, and Thailand is maximising it's revenue.

I believe most tourists don't have a problem with the pricing because even though they pay 10 times more it's still easily affordable. And whinging hypocritical expats only seem to have a problem with dual pricing when they're refused a discount.

The National parks no longer allow entry with a driving license, what has happened is that some private businesses have tagged on in order to increase profit. Yet when they are confronted with the realization that this may result in lost profit, the smart ones will relent. The national parks policy is based on race as I showed in a earlier post regarding Koreans gaining entry to the Emerald pool.

As for Southpeels post mentioning why my Thai wife deemed it necessary to ring up the attraction and ask what their policy is. She did it for a very simply reason. We do live some distance from that attraction and she did not want us to make a wasted journey, as she herself is not willing to enter such an establishment that discriminates against her husband. She KNOWS that it is based on race, and she is very ashamed of her country for allowing it. Which just goes to show that some Thais can think for themselves and ask the question "why".

Or brainwashed by their farang husband who's willing to drive some distance and enter for the Thai price that he doesn't qualify for, but claims racial discrimination when he has to pay the correct price based on nationality.

Ironically you and others condone discrimination when accepting the DL discount, which discriminates against are the foreigners that don't have a DL. Driving licence discrimination. They should be ashamed.

In reality it seems the pricing Thai/toursit thing is based on perceived residence therefore strictly speaking none of us should get in on the basis of a DL only as very few are legal residents in Thailand ie having Permanent Residence

I could see an argument for allowing WP holders "thai" rates given they are paying income tax in Thailand and need to produce their WP, which has happened to me a couple of times in some places the DL they wouldnt accept but said if i showed a WP i would be allowed in at Thai prices which i did and was allowed in....they never no cannot cos i am whitey

Slightly off topic, but how much income would a Farang have to earn, in order to be liable for income tax, and at what rate?

Off hand all i can say is you would need to look at the tax tables...but if memory serves even at a low salary of say 30k/m you will be paying some income tax but it will not be much say around 10%...but welcome to be corrected on this....i do know my own tax rate is 35% but i am lucky in that company covers this for me..

[arunsakda]

Not a Thai and not overcharged. He is a Foreigner, charged the official tariff levied on all ALIENS according to published government policy. The policy itself is not racist, and is consistent with other forms of legal price discrimination.

It is the ideas that underlie the policy that are racist. (Foreigners are all "rich" and can or should pay more.)

Also all caucasians are not foreigners. I have met at least one.

As for our NP's you can keep them. A dirty waterfall, a dusty carpark infested with feral dogs. Minging from their droppings and waystes. Nearby food sellers hawk food from stalls swarming with black flies.

Sent from Hades via a series of tubes

Edited October 19, 2015 by arunsakda

[KamalaRider]

Absolutely right. Discriminatory pricing in the case of park entrance is a business decision and I wish others would stop trying to connect it to racism. Tourism is a business, the park is a product, and Thailand is maximising it's revenue.

I believe most tourists don't have a problem with the pricing because even though they pay 10 times more it's still easily affordable. And whinging hypocritical expats only seem to have a problem with dual pricing when they're refused a discount.

According to your logic, Thais can never be tourists in their own country.

How does your logic figure that!

You just said tourists should pay 10X the price, but Thai tourists don't pay 10X, do they.

[Soutpeel]

Not a Thai and not overcharged. He is a Foreigner, charged the official tariff levied on all ALIENS according to published government policy. The policy itself is not racist, and is consistent with other forms of legal price discrimination.

It is the ideas that underlie the policy that are racist. (Foreigners are all "rich" and can or should pay more.)

Also all caucasians are not foreigners. I have met at least one.

As for our NP's you can keep them. A dirty waterfall, a dusty carpark infested with feral dogs. Minging from their droppings and waystes. Nearby food sellers hawk food from stalls swarming with black flies.

Sent from Hades via a series of tubes

So what your suggesting is....if i call some a cheap charlie i am being racist ?..

[arunsakda]

No not at all.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Edited October 19, 2015 by arunsakda

[elviajero]

Absolutely right. Discriminatory pricing in the case of park entrance is a business decision and I wish others would stop trying to connect it to racism. Tourism is a business, the park is a product, and Thailand is maximising it's revenue.

I believe most tourists don't have a problem with the pricing because even though they pay 10 times more it's still easily affordable. And whinging hypocritical expats only seem to have a problem with dual pricing when they're refused a discount.

According to your logic, Thais can never be tourists in their own country.

How does your logic figure that!

You just said tourists should pay 10X the price, but Thai tourists don't pay 10X, do they.

And you couldn't work out that I was talking about foreign tourists!

I said I believe most tourists (foreign) don't have a problem with the pricing. I didn't say they should pay 10 x the price. Whether or not someone pays is up to them.

[elviajero]

"Tourism is a business, the park is a product, and Thailand is maximising its revenue." - except that it isn't achieving that. What research has shown is that the income of NPs does not improve when charging grossly inflated prices to any particular category of visitor.

Around the world, there are many examples of higher pricing for "non-locals", BUT FEW WITH SUCH EXTREME DIFFERENTIATION.

Another point is that elsewhere, this differentiation in many cases is not "extra" for outsiders but a discount for the locals who live and work in the region.

the Thai model is emphatically NOT a sound economic model it is a knee-jerk response to some ill-conceived suppositions by ill-informed politicians and civil servants wit a baseless and blinkered perception of what is really going on.

I accept that overpricing could be self defeating but not dual pricing. Even if a foreigner pays 10 times as much as the local, at 200 baht it's still easily affordable for most foreign tourists and expats. I'm sure many tourists would be happy to pay extra to support the park.

Extra or discount it's the same result and just about marketing. I agree that it would be better PR to set the rate and give Thais a discount.

Dual pricing has gone on here for years and yet tourists still visit. I think the increase from 20/200 to 40/400 is possibly a mistake, but as long as they get at least 50% of the current visitor numbers they won't lose out.

There is a study on Thai NPs that shows that dual pricing does not generate extra income and can actually deter visitors......this is in common with experiences around the world.

Actually Thailand is not a cheap place and those who want to spend time in NPs can easily find it more expensive than staying in beach resort hotels....generalisations about who can or cannot afford to pay are not helpful....a proper management of NOPs will help not just tourism and Thailand's international image, it will help to conserve what is left of Thailand's unique natural resources...the policy is not just a financial farce, it is also an eco-disaster.

This thread proves that some are deterred. But in my opinion if they dropped the dual price the income would go down because I don't believe 10 foreigners are deterred for every 1 that pays. Put another way they would have to have 10 times as many foreigners visiting to generate the same income.

[Lukasisgood]

"Tourism is a business, the park is a product, and Thailand is maximising its revenue." - except that it isn't achieving that. What research has shown is that the income of NPs does not improve when charging grossly inflated prices to any particular category of visitor.

Around the world, there are many examples of higher pricing for "non-locals", BUT FEW WITH SUCH EXTREME DIFFERENTIATION.

Another point is that elsewhere, this differentiation in many cases is not "extra" for outsiders but a discount for the locals who live and work in the region.

the Thai model is emphatically NOT a sound economic model it is a knee-jerk response to some ill-conceived suppositions by ill-informed politicians and civil servants wit a baseless and blinkered perception of what is really going on.

I accept that overpricing could be self defeating but not dual pricing. Even if a foreigner pays 10 times as much as the local, at 200 baht it's still easily affordable for most foreign tourists and expats. I'm sure many tourists would be happy to pay extra to support the park.

Extra or discount it's the same result and just about marketing. I agree that it would be better PR to set the rate and give Thais a discount.

Dual pricing has gone on here for years and yet tourists still visit. I think the increase from 20/200 to 40/400 is possibly a mistake, but as long as they get at least 50% of the current visitor numbers they won't lose out.

There is a study on Thai NPs that shows that dual pricing does not generate extra income and can actually deter visitors......this is in common with experiences around the world.

Actually Thailand is not a cheap place and those who want to spend time in NPs can easily find it more expensive than staying in beach resort hotels....generalisations about who can or cannot afford to pay are not helpful....a proper management of NOPs will help not just tourism and Thailand's international image, it will help to conserve what is left of Thailand's unique natural resources...the policy is not just a financial farce, it is also an eco-disaster.

This thread proves that some are deterred. But in my opinion if they dropped the dual price the income would go down because I don't believe 10 foreigners are deterred for every 1 that pays. Put another way they would have to have 10 times as many foreigners visiting to generate the same income.

Excellent. This is called the elasticity of demand. And you are correct. Almost no amount of raceism would cause them to hurt their bank accounts.

[Peter Strand]

Racism yes or not, basicly I don t really care as I do not visit this "so called" attractions anyway, despite the fact that the policy is in my opinion not acceptable.

In this regard one question: About what attractions we are talking ? There are no "tourist attractions" in Thailand for which you need to pay money. The best attractions are: Lovely parks ( In Bangkok for example ), beautiful beaches ( yes, they are still existing and for free ), and tiny asses of young Caucasian girls. All other is - in my opinion - simply disorganized, dirty, unsafe and full of scam and below any standard. I suggest to visit KL or Singapore if you looking for "attractions". But Thailand ? No way.

Even the new shopping malls they currently will build on Phuket for the Chinese tourists will be a disaster if you know the UAE, KL and Singapore ( all cheaper - OK Singapore not really / maybe now as the SGD weakens to the US - and better quality )..

[ttthailand]

The answer is to not go to these places. We know that national parks charge 10 times the price but there should be a list of all other places charging extra. Some entertainment venues also have different prices for different people as they follow the government. These same entertainment places charging us higher prices however charge very low prices to the Chinese tours. They sometimes pay half or less of the normal Thai price. Perhaps if we stop going things will change. Only problem is tourists don't know and will pay anyhow.

I have already told my gf that I don't go to national parks due to this so she doesn't ask now. Her family are the ones who loose out as I am normally the person who drives.They can thank their government.

Foreigners pay to fly here, pay for visa, pay for airport arrival, pay for taxis from hotel, pay for hotel, pay for meals, etc etc .... They pay 7% VAT and many times 10% service. You would think they have already paid more tax than most Thais in just staying for two weeks. For the government to charge more is just wrong but when did doing something wrong stop this country.

all I can say to that is "more fool you!"

I WANT to see Thailand, if you just want to sit in a bar on a beach and pay way more for your food and drink than the locals, then that's up to you.

But why not do what the Chinese are doing - according to you - BARGAIN - if we had the support of our governments and tourism associations then it is possible the system might change.

....but not going to some of the most beautiful places in Thailand just because they overcharge is not something I'm prepared to do. I won't cut off my nose to spite my face (or my relatives)....

In the end many of Thais natural resources away from the beaches remain under-appreciated by foreign visitors and consequently under-funded; charging the few that do go extra won't make a difference, uyntil a seas-change occurs, they remain a resource that is ignored - not by boycotters - but simply because of mismanagement by the Thai authorities who basically should take a look at Australia or the States or other European countries and see how these sort of places can be both conserved and appreciated with proper management in a way that makes money by bringing in tourists.

I have already been and seen every place in Thailand. I have been here over 20 years. Why should I pay to see again ??? As for the family going they went before they knew me so if they really want to go they will find a way. And I don't sit in bars drinking all day as may be your idea of a good time.

Beaches, parks, and temples in Thailand are really not that interesting once you seen a few. Add to that the poor upkeep and the litter and I think maybe even the bar, as you suggest, might be more fun.

Edited October 20, 2015 by ttthailand

[Loeilad]

" have already been and seen every place in Thailand. I have been here over 20 years. Why should I pay to see again ???" - I think your own words and this "seen one, seen em all" sums up your attitude and the validity of your opinions better than I ever could

Edited October 20, 2015 by Loeilad

[mojorison]

And rightly so. If it looks like a farang, and talks like a farang.... it probably is a farang. It's all about the redistribution of wealth, and assisting the lower classes.