METV: I'm confused

[elviajero]

The METV seems to be another blatantly obvious clue that they are not looking for tourists to stay long term.

Many places couldn't get triple entry tourist visas before, some not even doubles.

By offering the METV which allows up to 9 months stay, to me it seems it's blatantly obvious that they're encouraging long stay tourism, as long as one has money. They're only trying to filter out actual undesirables like criminals or people taking jobs away from Thais as illegal tour guides etc. with some nominal proof of income requirements.

Until it's confirmed whether or not people can get METVs back to back, that is is the common sense conclusion.

I agree that the clincher will be whether or not they allow back to back METV's. Countries that require confirmation of a job for a visa application do so to satisfy that the person has a reason to go home again. If London insist on that I think it will be highly unlikely that they will issue them back to back.

I also agree that the METV will filter out many of the "undesirables", which is IMO is it's purpose.

[elviajero]

My point about your point is that although people can live in Thailand for as long as they want using multiple tourist visas, the restrictions by embassies/consulates, the cancellation of 2 and 3 entry TR's, and a new METV with tougher criteria all make it harder to stay here long term. And it suggests that the authorities do not want tourist visas to be used as a way to stay here long term.

Again this METV could take away all those consulate-specific issues and streamline the process of staying 9 months at a time, actually making it easier. We'll have to wait and see. At the moment people are just projecting their own assumptions and prejudices onto the actions of the Thai authorities.

Yes, it's about time that embassies/consulates published a set criteria (income etc) so that everyone knows where they stand. But 9 months isn't long term, and again we will have to wait and see if they allow back to back visas.

[luke000]

Again this METV could take away all those consulate-specific issues and streamline the process of staying 9 months at a time, actually making it easier. We'll have to wait and see. At the moment people are just projecting their own assumptions and prejudices onto the actions of the Thai authorities.

Its nothing to do with assumptions & prejudices . We have been given official info from Thai Embassys that this Visa will only be available from peoples home Countries and that people need to have a job in their home Countries .

We are all giving what ever information we can get to each other .

We are trying to figure out what the future holds for us on the info we have been provided with.

If the Thai authorities in Bangkok would release an official statement informing us of where this METV will be available and to whom and what are the required documents, then we really wouldnt be here trying to figure out what will happen

[louse1953]

Forget the METV for long stay it's just a trap. The easier way to stay in LOS is still the ED VISA. Of course it cost more but you can stay 1 year n Thailand whitout showing any proofs of revenue earned. I live in Pattaya so i know a scholl called Excel Language Centre who offer a 1 year ED Visa with english courses for 17 000 baths. And if you purpose is to stay Thailand only for sunny vacation you don't need to follow the english lesson. Ask the manager when you will apply, she is very comprehensive. You just need to be present when the police immigration come to check. That's all.

Well done Gatsby,now the whole world knows,including Immigration.

[oncearugge]

Forget the METV for long stay it's just a trap. The easier way to stay in LOS is still the ED VISA. Of course it cost more but you can stay 1 year n Thailand whitout showing any proofs of revenue earned. I live in Pattaya so i know a scholl called Excel Language Centre who offer a 1 year ED Visa with english courses for 17 000 baths. And if you purpose is to stay Thailand only for sunny vacation you don't need to follow the english lesson. Ask the manager when you will apply, she is very comprehensive. You just need to be present when the police immigration come to check. That's all.

Well done Gatsby,now the whole world knows,including Immigration.

One wonders how long this "scoll"(sic) will now remain open ?

[jspill]

Its nothing to do with assumptions & prejudices . We have been given official info from Thai Embassys that this Visa will only be available from peoples home Countries and that people need to have a job in their home Countries .

Not official yet at all. To paraphrase moderators on this site from other threads, the only consulates that asked for proof of a job were already known to be unfriendly as far as getting tourist visas from, even before the METV.

Several other consulates didn't mention that. Others still haven't updated their websites yet.

[JackThompson]

I agree that the clincher will be whether or not they allow back to back METV's. Countries that require confirmation of a job for a visa application do so to satisfy that the person has a reason to go home again. If London insist on that I think it will be highly unlikely that they will issue them back to back.

I also agree that the METV will filter out many of the "undesirables", which is IMO is it's purpose.

I agree that the "job confirmation" is usually used for this, in the visa context, by other countries. But to spite all the other requirements listed, that no mention of "back-to-back" is mentioned. Why?

I see the financial-requirements, with the 6-month reporting period, as the "flip side" to the METV offer - a person who maintains that $7K US (DC-rules) during 6 mo in Thailand (or the last 6 of 9 mo), even after purchasing airfare for the next round, can re-apply.

The rules, with the conspicuous absence of a "no-back-to-back" clause, lead me to the opposite conclusion, that this actually is a "nomad-friendly" visa, provided the nomad who can keep a moderate bank balance (a sacrifice, at zero interest), and manage the paperwork and fees to set up at least a shell-company in their home-country. The rest can work and save-up to meet the rules in Cambodia or the Philippines, and return.

I do regret the negative affect it will have in encouraging a more frugal lifestyle in Thailand for those who stay. And many may just leave. Either way, it means less foreign-money being spent in Thailand, no matter how you add it up. As said previously, I do not see how this in any way benefits any Thai person or visitor, or increases tourism, given no shortages of housing, goods, or services as-is.

Edited November 3, 2015 by JackThompson

[VBF]

Forget the METV for long stay it's just a trap. The easier way to stay in LOS is still the ED VISA. Of course it cost more but you can stay 1 year n Thailand whitout showing any proofs of revenue earned. I live in Pattaya so i know a scholl called Excel Language Centre who offer a 1 year ED Visa with english courses for 17 000 baths. And if you purpose is to stay Thailand only for sunny vacation you don't need to follow the english lesson. Ask the manager when you will apply, she is very comprehensive. You just need to be present when the police immigration come to check. That's all.

Well done Gatsby,now the whole world knows,including Immigration.

One wonders how long this "scoll"(sic) will now remain open ?

Yeah, Gatsby not only shot himself in the foot but managed some potential "collateral damage" I fear. Often worth thinking before posting

[BritTim]

I agree that the clincher will be whether or not they allow back to back METV's. Countries that require confirmation of a job for a visa application do so to satisfy that the person has a reason to go home again. If London insist on that I think it will be highly unlikely that they will issue them back to back.

I also agree that the METV will filter out many of the "undesirables", which is IMO is it's purpose.

I do not think a visa that no one will ever use will get rid of anyone. You might just as well claim that the ACMECS visa (remember that) should be effective in ridding the country of undesirables.

What will have some effect is abolition of double and triple entry tourist visas. This will make it less convenient for some to come and go frequently over an extended period. Whether the effect will be to rid the country of wealthy, big spenders or of indigent English teachers is debatable. The idea that it will prevent people with criminal intent (such as drug trafficers) from entering the country is, to my mind, laughable.

[VBF]

I agree that the clincher will be whether or not they allow back to back METV's. Countries that require confirmation of a job for a visa application do so to satisfy that the person has a reason to go home again. If London insist on that I think it will be highly unlikely that they will issue them back to back.

I also agree that the METV will filter out many of the "undesirables", which is IMO is it's purpose.

I agree that the "job confirmation" is usually used for this, in the visa context, by other countries. But to spite all the other requirements listed, that no mention of "back-to-back" is mentioned. Why?

I see the financial-requirements, with the 6-month reporting period, as the "flip side" to the METV offer - a person who maintains that $7K US (DC-rules) during 6 mo in Thailand (or the last 6 of 9 mo), even after purchasing airfare for the next round, can re-apply.

The rules, with the conspicuous absence of a "no-back-to-back" clause, lead me to the opposite conclusion, that this actually is a "nomad-friendly" visa, provided the nomad who can keep a moderate bank balance (a sacrifice, at zero interest), and manage the paperwork and fees to set up at least a shell-company in their home-country. The rest can work and save-up to meet the rules in Cambodia or the Philippines, and return.

I do regret the negative affect it will have in encouraging a more frugal lifestyle in Thailand for those who stay. And many may just leave. Either way, it means less foreign-money being spent in Thailand, no matter how you add it up. As said previously, I do not see how this in any way benefits any Thai person or visitor, or increases tourism, given no shortages of housing, goods, or services as-is.

Jack I agree with all of that except the idea of setting up a shell-company. I mean I know why you said that but is it not encouraging people to "bend" the rules and akin to using a company to buy a house? As such, it is likely to eventually be jumped on.

Edited November 3, 2015 by VBF

[oncearugge]

I agree that the clincher will be whether or not they allow back to back METV's. Countries that require confirmation of a job for a visa application do so to satisfy that the person has a reason to go home again. If London insist on that I think it will be highly unlikely that they will issue them back to back.

I also agree that the METV will filter out many of the "undesirables", which is IMO is it's purpose.

I agree that the "job confirmation" is usually used for this, in the visa context, by other countries. But to spite all the other requirements listed, that no mention of "back-to-back" is mentioned. Why?

I see the financial-requirements, with the 6-month reporting period, as the "flip side" to the METV offer - a person who maintains that $7K US (DC-rules) during 6 mo in Thailand (or the last 6 of 9 mo), even after purchasing airfare for the next round, can re-apply.

The rules, with the conspicuous absence of a "no-back-to-back" clause, lead me to the opposite conclusion, that this actually is a "nomad-friendly" visa, provided the nomad who can keep a moderate bank balance (a sacrifice, at zero interest), and manage the paperwork and fees to set up at least a shell-company in their home-country. The rest can work and save-up to meet the rules in Cambodia or the Philippines, and return.

I do regret the negative affect it will have in encouraging a more frugal lifestyle in Thailand for those who stay. And many may just leave. Either way, it means less foreign-money being spent in Thailand, no matter how you add it up. As said previously, I do not see how this in any way benefits any Thai person or visitor, or increases tourism, given no shortages of housing, goods, or services as-is.

How much is the DN trade worth to Thailand ?

Living in cheap accommodation and eating from the local noodle stall will not add much to the Thai economy .

[elviajero]

I agree that the clincher will be whether or not they allow back to back METV's. Countries that require confirmation of a job for a visa application do so to satisfy that the person has a reason to go home again. If London insist on that I think it will be highly unlikely that they will issue them back to back.

I also agree that the METV will filter out many of the "undesirables", which is IMO is it's purpose.

I do not think a visa that no one will ever use will get rid of anyone. You might just as well claim that the ACMECS visa (remember that) should be effective in ridding the country of undesirables.

What will have some effect is abolition of double and triple entry tourist visas. This will make it less convenient for some to come and go frequently over an extended period. Whether the effect will be to rid the country of wealthy, big spenders or of indigent English teachers is debatable. The idea that it will prevent people with criminal intent (such as drug trafficers) from entering the country is, to my mind, laughable.

The METV will play it's part because many that would have used double/triple TR's won't meet the criteria and will be left with single entries. If the embassies/consulates in neighbouring countries allow back to back single TR's then nothing will change. But if they limit them, as I suspect they will, then it will be game over for many.

Edited November 3, 2015 by elviajero

[Seizetheday]

I agree that the clincher will be whether or not they allow back to back METV's. Countries that require confirmation of a job for a visa application do so to satisfy that the person has a reason to go home again. If London insist on that I think it will be highly unlikely that they will issue them back to back.

I also agree that the METV will filter out many of the "undesirables", which is IMO is it's purpose.

I agree that the "job confirmation" is usually used for this, in the visa context, by other countries. But to spite all the other requirements listed, that no mention of "back-to-back" is mentioned. Why?

I see the financial-requirements, with the 6-month reporting period, as the "flip side" to the METV offer - a person who maintains that $7K US (DC-rules) during 6 mo in Thailand (or the last 6 of 9 mo), even after purchasing airfare for the next round, can re-apply.

The rules, with the conspicuous absence of a "no-back-to-back" clause, lead me to the opposite conclusion, that this actually is a "nomad-friendly" visa, provided the nomad who can keep a moderate bank balance (a sacrifice, at zero interest), and manage the paperwork and fees to set up at least a shell-company in their home-country. The rest can work and save-up to meet the rules in Cambodia or the Philippines, and return.

I do regret the negative affect it will have in encouraging a more frugal lifestyle in Thailand for those who stay. And many may just leave. Either way, it means less foreign-money being spent in Thailand, no matter how you add it up. As said previously, I do not see how this in any way benefits any Thai person or visitor, or increases tourism, given no shortages of housing, goods, or services as-is.

Set a shell company up to get a visa, how f...k.d is that.

[ParadiseLost]

Forget the METV for long stay it's just a trap. The easier way to stay in LOS is still the ED VISA. Of course it cost more but you can stay 1 year n Thailand whitout showing any proofs of revenue earned. I live in Pattaya so i know a scholl called Excel Language Centre who offer a 1 year ED Visa with english courses for 17 000 baths. And if you purpose is to stay Thailand only for sunny vacation you don't need to follow the english lesson. Ask the manager when you will apply, she is very comprehensive. You just need to be present when the police immigration come to check. That's all.

And posting that is the exact reason why some visas are getting harder to obtain

Not very bright are you?

I think he wants to get rid of the competition.

All of his 3 post mention Excel...

"you don't need to follow the english lesson"

You don't say, obviously you didn't...

Is this not bordering upon discussing illegal activities? 'Schools' offering bogus visas allowed to advertise here now?

All these quality 'tourists' and the brightest 'students' wanting to live in Thailand, just which part of 'entitlement' do you not understand. Just because you want something it should be so?

[BritTim]

How much is the DN trade worth to Thailand ?

Living in cheap accommodation and eating from the local noodle stall will not add much to the Thai economy .

Digital nomads vary tremendously. Some live a precarious life on very limited sporadic incomes. I know one who makes US$3,000 a day and is busy.

Those at the bottom of the income scale certainly are not big spenders, but their presence is still, on balance, positive for the economy. The noodle store owner gaining a little extra income can allow her to support her kids through university. It is not only those eating at the Normadie Grill that promote economic growth.

[elviajero]

I agree that the clincher will be whether or not they allow back to back METV's. Countries that require confirmation of a job for a visa application do so to satisfy that the person has a reason to go home again. If London insist on that I think it will be highly unlikely that they will issue them back to back.

I also agree that the METV will filter out many of the "undesirables", which is IMO is it's purpose.

I agree that the "job confirmation" is usually used for this, in the visa context, by other countries. But to spite all the other requirements listed, that no mention of "back-to-back" is mentioned. Why?

I see the financial-requirements, with the 6-month reporting period, as the "flip side" to the METV offer - a person who maintains that $7K US (DC-rules) during 6 mo in Thailand (or the last 6 of 9 mo), even after purchasing airfare for the next round, can re-apply.

The rules, with the conspicuous absence of a "no-back-to-back" clause, lead me to the opposite conclusion, that this actually is a "nomad-friendly" visa, provided the nomad who can keep a moderate bank balance (a sacrifice, at zero interest), and manage the paperwork and fees to set up at least a shell-company in their home-country. The rest can work and save-up to meet the rules in Cambodia or the Philippines, and return.

I do regret the negative affect it will have in encouraging a more frugal lifestyle in Thailand for those who stay. And many may just leave. Either way, it means less foreign-money being spent in Thailand, no matter how you add it up. As said previously, I do not see how this in any way benefits any Thai person or visitor, or increases tourism, given no shortages of housing, goods, or services as-is.

I agree that the METV is perfect for DM's that can meet the requirements. And it could be that the authorities believe the strict requirements are filter enough and will allow back to back METV's. And we might see back to back applications allowed in certain countries.

But I wouldn't read anything in to the absence of a back to back clause as that is already in the power of embassies and consulates.

[JackThompson]

The rules, with the conspicuous absence of a "no-back-to-back" clause, lead me to the opposite conclusion, that this actually is a "nomad-friendly" visa, provided the nomad who can keep a moderate bank balance (a sacrifice, at zero interest), and manage the paperwork and fees to set up at least a shell-company in their home-country. The rest can work and save-up to meet the rules in Cambodia or the Philippines, and return.

I do regret the negative affect it will have in encouraging a more frugal lifestyle in Thailand for those who stay. And many may just leave. Either way, it means less foreign-money being spent in Thailand, no matter how you add it up. As said previously, I do not see how this in any way benefits any Thai person or visitor, or increases tourism, given no shortages of housing, goods, or services as-is.

How much is the DN trade worth to Thailand ? Living in cheap accommodation and eating from the local noodle stall will not add much to the Thai economy .

The new rules may drag some fresh-starters into that lifestyle, given more of their money will be diverted out of Thailand, now. But it is an error to think that most DNs don't earn considerably more than the average pensioner. What many do is akin to engineering - in creativity, scale and complexity. I doubt many earn less than 70K Baht/mo - and that is the bottom end of the scale for a decent coder.

Jack I agree with all of that except the idea of setting up a shell-company. I mean I know why you said that but is it not encouraging people to "bend" the rules and akin to using a company to buy a house? As such, it is likely to eventually be jumped on.

I will be using my company (which actually has 'income' and hires talent), but the option is there for others, who are paid into personal accounts. My point is, the requirement is a bit silly and easy to work-around. "Show us the money" - now that makes sense.

[BuckBee]

How much is the DN trade worth to Thailand ?

Living in cheap accommodation and eating from the local noodle stall will not add much to the Thai economy .

Digital nomads vary tremendously. Some live a precarious life on very limited sporadic incomes. I know one who makes US$3,000 a day and is busy.

Those at the bottom of the income scale certainly are not big spenders, but their presence is still, on balance, positive for the economy. The noodle store owner gaining a little extra income can allow her to support her kids through university. It is not only those eating at the Normadie Grill that promote economic growth.

Yep it was positive for economy, just review the income from popular visa run services that ran 7 days a week, room rental & supporting local vendors was a good thing.

Current situation of 1 not full mini van run 3 days a week, empty apartments & struggling vendors gives an idea of some of the difference .

The real scum will still get in so not a huge amount will be gained.

Edited November 3, 2015 by BuckBee

[jspill]

Is this not bordering upon discussing illegal activities? 'Schools' offering bogus visas allowed to advertise here now?

All these quality 'tourists' and the brightest 'students' wanting to live in Thailand, just which part of 'entitlement' do you not understand. Just because you want something it should be so?

It would've been deleted if someone had simply clicked report on the initial post. Instead several are quoting the post over and over as it's perfect fuel for their 'visa abuse' argument... never mind the fact it might have been a troll or written by a school owner, many of which are Thai. The account has 3 posts.

[bigjohn72]

Well done Gatsby,now the whole world knows,including Immigration.

That's exactly his/her goal!

Edited November 3, 2015 by bigjohn72

[bigjohn72]

And posting that is the exact reason why some visas are getting harder to obtain

Not very bright are you?

I think he wants to get rid of the competition.

All of his 3 post mention Excel...

"you don't need to follow the english lesson"

You don't say, obviously you didn't...

Is this not bordering upon discussing illegal activities? 'Schools' offering bogus visas allowed to advertise here now?

All these quality 'tourists' and the brightest 'students' wanting to live in Thailand, just which part of 'entitlement' do you not understand. Just because you want something it should be so?

He/she is definitely NOT a student!

[VBF]

The rules, with the conspicuous absence of a "no-back-to-back" clause, lead me to the opposite conclusion, that this actually is a "nomad-friendly" visa, provided the nomad who can keep a moderate bank balance (a sacrifice, at zero interest), and manage the paperwork and fees to set up at least a shell-company in their home-country. The rest can work and save-up to meet the rules in Cambodia or the Philippines, and return.

I do regret the negative affect it will have in encouraging a more frugal lifestyle in Thailand for those who stay. And many may just leave. Either way, it means less foreign-money being spent in Thailand, no matter how you add it up. As said previously, I do not see how this in any way benefits any Thai person or visitor, or increases tourism, given no shortages of housing, goods, or services as-is.

How much is the DN trade worth to Thailand ? Living in cheap accommodation and eating from the local noodle stall will not add much to the Thai economy .

The new rules may drag some fresh-starters into that lifestyle, given more of their money will be diverted out of Thailand, now. But it is an error to think that most DNs don't earn considerably more than the average pensioner. What many do is akin to engineering - in creativity, scale and complexity. I doubt many earn less than 70K Baht/mo - and that is the bottom end of the scale for a decent coder.

Jack I agree with all of that except the idea of setting up a shell-company. I mean I know why you said that but is it not encouraging people to "bend" the rules and akin to using a company to buy a house? As such, it is likely to eventually be jumped on.

I will be using my company (which actually has 'income' and hires talent), but the option is there for others, who are paid into personal accounts. My point is, the requirement is a bit silly and easy to work-around. "Show us the money" - now that makes sense.

I get that. In your case it's a real company doing real work and I presume "within the spirit" of the regs. In the past I was also a Director of a Limited Company in UK and was honestly trading - enough to satisfy HMRC!

No, it was the idea of "setting up a shell-company" that caught my eye and would, i think, be deemed a subterfuge - IF anyone found out.

But the game of cat and mouse continues......

Edited November 3, 2015 by VBF

[JB300]

How much is the DN trade worth to Thailand ?

Living in cheap accommodation and eating from the local noodle stall will not add much to the Thai economy .

Digital nomads vary tremendously. Some live a precarious life on very limited sporadic incomes. I know one who makes US$3,000 a day and is busy.

Those at the bottom of the income scale certainly are not big spenders, but their presence is still, on balance, positive for the economy. The noodle store owner gaining a little extra income can allow her to support her kids through university. It is not only those eating at the Normadie Grill that promote economic growth.

Yep it was positive for economy, just review the income from popular visa run services that ran 7 days a week, room rental & supporting local vendors was a good thing.

Current situation of 1 not full mini van run 3 days a week, empty apartments & struggling vendors gives an idea of some of the difference .

The real scum will still get in so not a huge amount will be gained.

Won't the Visa Run companies make more money by people not eligible for the METV being forced to subsist on SETVs???

[oncearugge]

How much is the DN trade worth to Thailand ?

Living in cheap accommodation and eating from the local noodle stall will not add much to the Thai economy .

Digital nomads vary tremendously. Some live a precarious life on very limited sporadic incomes. I know one who makes US$3,000 a day and is busy.

Those at the bottom of the income scale certainly are not big spenders, but their presence is still, on balance, positive for the economy. The noodle store owner gaining a little extra income can allow her to support her kids through university. It is not only those eating at the Normadie Grill that promote economic growth.

Yep it was positive for economy, just review the income from popular visa run services that ran 7 days a week, room rental & supporting local vendors was a good thing.

Current situation of 1 not full mini van run 3 days a week, empty apartments & struggling vendors gives an idea of some of the difference .

The real scum will still get in so not a huge amount will be gained.

Won't the Visa Run companies make more money by people not eligible for the METV being forced to subsist on SETVs???

Maybe , until the availability of back to back single entry TV's dries up !

[elviajero]

Jack I agree with all of that except the idea of setting up a shell-company. I mean I know why you said that but is it not encouraging people to "bend" the rules and akin to using a company to buy a house? As such, it is likely to eventually be jumped on.

I will be using my company (which actually has 'income' and hires talent), but the option is there for others, who are paid into personal accounts. My point is, the requirement is a bit silly and easy to work-around. "Show us the money" - now that makes sense.

I get that. In your case it's a real company doing real work and I presume "within the spirit" of the regs. In the past I was also a Director of a Limited Company in UK and was honestly trading - enough to satisfy HMRC!

No, it was the idea of "setting up a shell-company" that caught my eye and would, i think, be deemed a subterfuge - IF anyone found out.

But the game of cat and mouse continues......

I would assume that most DM's are self employed and for those the problem might be convincing the embassy/consulate that they do not need to operate their business while in Thailand. Especially if applying for back to back METV's.

[oncearugge]

Jack I agree with all of that except the idea of setting up a shell-company. I mean I know why you said that but is it not encouraging people to "bend" the rules and akin to using a company to buy a house? As such, it is likely to eventually be jumped on.

I will be using my company (which actually has 'income' and hires talent), but the option is there for others, who are paid into personal accounts. My point is, the requirement is a bit silly and easy to work-around. "Show us the money" - now that makes sense.

I get that. In your case it's a real company doing real work and I presume "within the spirit" of the regs. In the past I was also a Director of a Limited Company in UK and was honestly trading - enough to satisfy HMRC!

No, it was the idea of "setting up a shell-company" that caught my eye and would, i think, be deemed a subterfuge - IF anyone found out.

But the game of cat and mouse continues......

I would assume that most DM's are self employed and for those the problem might be convincing the embassy/consulate that they do not need to operate their business while in Thailand. Especially if applying for back to back METV's.

They will attempt to lie in the same way they lie now to secure tourist visas.

"For Attention of Applicant:

I hereby confirm that the purpose of my visit to

Thailand is already identified in this application form and

the information given is correct and complete." **

**

http://thaiembassyuk.org.uk/Consular/Form/visaapplication2015.pdf

[uptheos]

Why!

Do you know how many backpackers buy 2 or 3 entry TR's.

How long the average backpacker stays in Thailand.

How many times they exit/re-enter.

Most backpackers are gap year students that travel through many countries. Surely a 90 day stay in Thailand is enough for most. If not they could get another SETV or use visa exempt entry.

You're predicting unnecessary doom and gloom.

a lot of them base themseves in thailand and come and go often

I still have an old British passport which chronicles my gap year back packing travels.

15 countries spending an average of 3 weeks in each country.

Seems the modern day "back packer" has limited horizons

the old never understand or approve of the young

Not true, I have backpacked around many countries of the world and when I see young backpackers today, I hope that they have a great time and get the joy out of it that I did in my younger days.

[The manic]

Returning to Blighty every six months is ideal. You keep your right to free NHS treatment and you can see late spring, summer, and some autumn. Under current new rules if you are non resident for over three months you lose your your right to free NHS treatment.

Yeah and I herd u will loose your tax free allowance soon,can you post a link where u herd about that please

Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk

Well the info re NHS was circulated by my company medical service via memo. re tax relief: that will be on property rentals I believe.

[AYJAYDEE]

Would the average tourist need a 6 month multiple entry visa or would the single entry visa be more than enough for the average tourist?

If they were planning to base themselves in Thailand for a SEA tour, then yes because of the convenience of the multi entry. Even in this day and age there are still people that wish to experience the holiday of a lifetime at least once.

Without defining the term tourist too much, i am talking about individuals or families not included in the masses that make up the tourism numbers through package tours.

Edit: As i said earlier, what has been said so far about this METV is certainly not for everyone, and to that end will not affect everyone.

You said the "average tourist" and I wouldn't consider someone basing themselves in Thailand an average tourist. And I'm not really sure how a tourist can base themselves anywhere. Surely they are based in whatever hotel/country they happen to be in.

Agreed that it's definitely not for everyone and I still believe that the average tourist and tourism will not be affected by the change. The only group of "tourists" that will be affected are the group that are being targeted.

AND retirees who want to escape winter

[elviajero]

Would the average tourist need a 6 month multiple entry visa or would the single entry visa be more than enough for the average tourist?

If they were planning to base themselves in Thailand for a SEA tour, then yes because of the convenience of the multi entry. Even in this day and age there are still people that wish to experience the holiday of a lifetime at least once.

Without defining the term tourist too much, i am talking about individuals or families not included in the masses that make up the tourism numbers through package tours.

Edit: As i said earlier, what has been said so far about this METV is certainly not for everyone, and to that end will not affect everyone.

You said the "average tourist" and I wouldn't consider someone basing themselves in Thailand an average tourist. And I'm not really sure how a tourist can base themselves anywhere. Surely they are based in whatever hotel/country they happen to be in.

Agreed that it's definitely not for everyone and I still believe that the average tourist and tourism will not be affected by the change. The only group of "tourists" that will be affected are the group that are being targeted.

AND retirees who want to escape winter

It may well be that some embassies/consulates will issue the METV to retirees.

If not they are only affected by having to buy two SETV's instead of one METV. The second SETV could easily be obtained on the compulsory exit to a neighbouring country.