CityNews – The designer and owner of the White Temple in Chiang Rai, Chalermchai Kositpipat, announced last week that beginning in October, foreign visitors will need to pay money to enjoy the attraction, as people are not spending enough money when they visit. http://www.chiangmaicitylife.com/news/chiang-rais-white-temple-to-charge-foreign-visitors/

As it not really a temple as such, why not good luck to him.He has to recoup his costs somehow.

Another place not to visit.

Any other Chiang Rai-specific news we should know about?

Fair enough - and the Thais can donate if they wish.

DELETED

The white Temple is one of the most outstanding attractions that i personally have found in Thailand, i was amazed it was free when i visited, there are not to many attractions in the world with that level of detail for free, i don't have an issue with paying and if i find myself in the area again i would visit.

Not a temple. The guy was whining after the earthquake that he would close it. Paper temples are not earthquake proof, but shortly afterwards he reconsidered. It's a commercial enterprise and as written if people don't spend enough, they need to make money some other way. Typical Thai "logic", only 50% of people come, double the price. Why not go to a real temple and make a donation?

Not a temple. The guy was whining after the earthquake that he would close it. Paper temples are not earthquake proof, but shortly afterwards he reconsidered. It's a commercial enterprise and as written if people don't spend enough, they need to make money some other way. Typical Thai "logic", only 50% of people come, double the price. Why not go to a real temple and make a donation?

To answer your question, two reasons; the first is that the white temple is not a religious temple, occupied by guys in saffron robes - I would have no intention of donating anything that bunch. Secondly, the Wat Rong Khun is far more attractive than almost any Buddhist wat I have seen in Thailand.

Duplicate post removed

As it's not a religious site, I understand an entrance fee. I don't understand, or agree with, entrance fees for real temples. For example, Doi Suthep temple is a tourist attraction. There's nothing spiritual practiced there; therefore, they charge an entrance fee. The entrance fee helps pay for the abbot's holiday trips to US amusement parks.

So if it is commercial, it's ok to charge foreigners but not Thais. If it is religious it is not

Visited last year and will say that I was impressed. There was however a few bus loads of Chinese who were shouting and blocking the walk ways and toilet. My gf and I hung one of those ornaments you buy and put your name on. This and donations were what appeared to be their main source of income. The Chinese didn't do either thus no money made from them. For the Chinese it was a free stop to see the temple and use the toilet.

In this case I see why they want to charge.

So if it is commercial, it's ok to charge foreigners but not Thais. If it is religious it is not

Look at it this way if it was your own commercial enterprise would you not feel it was your rite to charge as you see fit to support it.

If no Thais ever come just tourists you would eventually loose the reputation as a Thai tourist stop. Yes there would still be Thais but not in a volume you would need to be a Thai tourist stop. Charge them a little. Make it in the same proportion as the wages they receive as a person doing the same job in England would get.

I know in my trade a person in North America would make more in an hour than a Thai over here in a day.

Topic already running here.

/Closed