Thanyaburi Mac Posted October 25, 2016 Share Posted October 25, 2016 That Other Paper is saying: "All museums, archaeological sites and historical parks under the supervision of the Fine Arts Department will be open to Thais and foreign tourists free of charge until Jan 31 next year." Be nice if it's correct. Mac Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kowpot Posted October 25, 2016 Share Posted October 25, 2016 I guess the key to this is, " under the supervision of the Fine Arts Department " . Not sure what all falls under their jurisdiction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kowpot Posted October 25, 2016 Share Posted October 25, 2016 Just now, kowpot said: I guess the key to this is, " under the supervision of the Fine Arts Department " . Not sure what all falls under their jurisdiction. Just answered my own question. http://www.moe.go.th/webfad/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
allane Posted October 25, 2016 Share Posted October 25, 2016 The fact that Thailand has dual pricing (i.e. serious over-charging of foreigners) tells me everything I need to know about Thai culture. The fact that it is being discontinued for a short time tells me almost nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zorro1 Posted October 25, 2016 Share Posted October 25, 2016 Make it free and still the moaners come out.. Pathetic Sent from my SC-01D using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rogeroc Posted October 25, 2016 Share Posted October 25, 2016 It is a step in the right direction, they could have made it free just for Thais Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Grumpy Posted October 25, 2016 Share Posted October 25, 2016 8 hours ago, allane said: The fact that Thailand has dual pricing (i.e. serious over-charging of foreigners) It's not over-charging foreigners, it's under-charging Thais, because they are poor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White Christmas13 Posted October 25, 2016 Share Posted October 25, 2016 3 minutes ago, Happy Grumpy said: It's not over-charging foreigners, it's under-charging Thais, because they are poor. Go back where you come from Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cumgranosalum Posted October 25, 2016 Share Posted October 25, 2016 8 hours ago, zorro1 said: Make it free and still the moaners come out.. Pathetic Sent from my SC-01D using Tapatalk The nature of dual pricing in Thailand is particularly galling and reflects very badly on the nation's image as whole. I think the saddest part of this is the attractions that are being opened free are probably the ones most likely to be damaged by this dictum. I get the feeling they just haven't thought it through. We are talking about the nations heritage and to suddenly through it open to a large number of extra visitors - something which one ca be fairly certain they are totally unprepared for is just foolhardy in the extreme. dual pricing or not this has all the hallmarks of an ill thought out and possibly damaging move. if they really wanted to show off Thailand's resources and heritage they could open up the national parks or just reduce the pricing - they would probably actually increase their income with a reduction in prices there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Denim Posted October 25, 2016 Share Posted October 25, 2016 It's only really free when it is put to the test. When verification comes in it will be plausible. As it is it has yet to be put to the acid test in places often uninformed of any official policy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
balo Posted October 25, 2016 Share Posted October 25, 2016 I wonder if it really will be free in all the national parks ? Maybe a good time to visit them all now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cumgranosalum Posted October 25, 2016 Share Posted October 25, 2016 5 hours ago, balo said: I wonder if it really will be free in all the national parks ? Maybe a good time to visit them all now As far as I'm aware there is no mention of National parks in this dictum Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
impulse Posted October 25, 2016 Share Posted October 25, 2016 Without dual pricing, a lot of the venues I enjoy would either go out of business or have to curtail the level of amenities they offer to the point I wouldn't want to visit them anyway. So I'm in favor of dual pricing. If the venue isn't worth the higher price to me, I just don't go. No use complaining. If everyone paid the Thai price, the places would be packed and they still wouldn't bring in enough $$$ to pay the bills. If everyone paid the higher price, the places would be like foreign (and rich Thai) ghost towns and they wouldn't bring in enough money to pay the bills. I'd be careful what you wish for. I'd rather be able to choose whether to visit than to see a shuttered attraction or the shell of what used to be a fun place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cumgranosalum Posted October 26, 2016 Share Posted October 26, 2016 21 minutes ago, impulse said: Without dual pricing, a lot of the venues I enjoy would either go out of business or have to curtail the level of amenities they offer to the point I wouldn't want to visit them anyway. So I'm in favor of dual pricing. If the venue isn't worth the higher price to me, I just don't go. No use complaining. If everyone paid the Thai price, the places would be packed and they still wouldn't bring in enough $$$ to pay the bills. If everyone paid the higher price, the places would be like foreign (and rich Thai) ghost towns and they wouldn't bring in enough money to pay the bills. I'd be careful what you wish for. I'd rather be able to choose whether to visit than to see a shuttered attraction or the shell of what used to be a fun place. "Without dual pricing, a lot of the venues I enjoy would either go out of business or have to curtail the level of amenities they offer to the point I wouldn't want to visit them anyway." - this is a totally unsubstantiated assertion and wildly inaccurate. All countries have policies for preserving natural beauty and national heritage - in theUK for instance in many cases this is free. the issues are not simply down to charging they are about how a country looks after its heritage and funds it. it is also about how many people in the country (tourists included) make use of or enjoy those assets. If you reduce fees more people actually visit and in fact income from visitors often increases. furthermore entrance fees - whatever the level seldom pay for upkeep of any attraction - the best they do is contribute a small amount - the way visitors help and attraction is by secondary payments - e.g. what they buy when they are there....this ca be books, tours etc etc - but before you can do this t, you need visitors and high entrance fees have been demonstrated time and again to drive customers and visitors away. National museums, parks and works of art are a nation's heritage, an attraction for both citizens and tourists alike if the people and those visiting a country can't see them, what is the point of them being there? Thailand's policy to their heritage at times gives the impression of a dog in the manger attitude. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cumgranosalum Posted October 26, 2016 Share Posted October 26, 2016 10 hours ago, White Christmas13 said: Go back where you come from Not really - in UK many places are free to enter as the policy is to allow people to see regardless of their income. Discounts are offered to many categories at paying places. Thailand's problem is exemplified by dual pricing as an example of their failure to satisfactorily mange their heritage is an efficient way. this leads to damage and degradation of sites both natural and man-made, lack of upkeep of both sites and contents means that these "gems" are being lost or allowed to fade away. if Thailand is to maintain its national heritage (in all its forms) there needs to be a serious and radical reform of how they approach the issues. Thailand has several World Heritage sites which operate a dual pricing system yet they are at least partly funded by international money - I find this particularly insulting. There is also a matter of maintenance and the ever-present threat of losing World Heritage Status. There are also sites waitng to be added to the W.H. list - they hae to show they are capable of looking after these sites first. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laughing Gravy Posted October 26, 2016 Share Posted October 26, 2016 7 minutes ago, cumgranosalum said: National museums, parks and works of art are a nation's heritage, an attraction for both citizens and tourists alike if the people and those visiting a country can't see them, what is the point of them being there? Thailand's policy to their heritage at times gives the impression of a dog in the manger attitude. How very well put and so true. For a nation so proud you would expect the Thais to be shouting from the 'roof tops' on the culture and history and I believe they should. So many museums in London are free encouraging understanding and heritage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Grumpy Posted October 26, 2016 Share Posted October 26, 2016 Will Western owned and managed businesses in Thailand that insist on dual-pricing, such as Siam Ocean World, follow suit? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cumgranosalum Posted October 26, 2016 Share Posted October 26, 2016 5 minutes ago, Happy Grumpy said: Will Western owned and managed businesses in Thailand that insist on dual-pricing, such as Siam Ocean World, follow suit? most companies in Thailand are 51% Thai owned - Ocean world IMO is not a cultural asset, it is a circus or zoo.....their mangement will be Thai?foreign combination. The fact is that dual pricing is not a good business decision...i suspect that "western" companies that do this are doing so out of pressure from thai sources and doing it against common sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
impulse Posted October 26, 2016 Share Posted October 26, 2016 25 minutes ago, Laughing Gravy said: How very well put and so true. For a nation so proud you would expect the Thais to be shouting from the 'roof tops' on the culture and history and I believe they should. So many museums in London are free encouraging understanding and heritage. In a nation where the average salary is $5,000 per month, it may make sense to ask taxpayers to subsidize "national treasures". In a nation where the average salary is closer to $500 per month, not so much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laughing Gravy Posted October 26, 2016 Share Posted October 26, 2016 7 minutes ago, impulse said: In a nation where the average salary is $5,000 per month, it may make sense to ask taxpayers to subsidize "national treasures". In a nation where the average salary is closer to $500 per month, not so much. Your rational simply is wrong. It is about dual pricing. Shall we have a sign with a list of nationalities on how much they should pay due to the average salary? Do Indians get in for 10 Baht as they earn less? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cumgranosalum Posted October 26, 2016 Share Posted October 26, 2016 4 minutes ago, impulse said: In a nation where the average salary is $5,000 per month, it may make sense to ask taxpayers to subsidize "national treasures". In a nation where the average salary is closer to $500 per month, not so much. This is not a simple tax/income thing. The government funds roads, civil engineering, Army and Navy as well as various other major financial burdens, so one has to ask how much is actually needed for basic planning and maintenance of national heritage sites. as said many sites can also generate more income through secondary sales rather than charge for entry, which is both unpopular with foreigners and discourages visitors as a whole. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Grumpy Posted October 26, 2016 Share Posted October 26, 2016 27 minutes ago, cumgranosalum said: most companies in Thailand are 51% Thai owned - Ocean world IMO is not a cultural asset, it is a circus or zoo.....their mangement will be Thai?foreign combination. Sea Life Bangkok (Siam Ocean World) is 100% Western Owned (by Merlin Entertainment) with Western manager. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cumgranosalum Posted October 26, 2016 Share Posted October 26, 2016 2 hours ago, Happy Grumpy said: Sea Life Bangkok (Siam Ocean World) is 100% Western Owned (by Merlin Entertainment) with Western manager. Firstly, I don't see you are actually making any point...secondly I doubt your informationis correct Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Grumpy Posted October 26, 2016 Share Posted October 26, 2016 It's pretty obvious. *shoulder shrug* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JHolmesJr Posted October 26, 2016 Share Posted October 26, 2016 (edited) you could probably count the number of farangs in thailand who are there for the museums…doesn't cost them anything to make it free. Id be impressed if they waived bar fines and unjustified motorcyclist "fines" for a month. Edited October 26, 2016 by JHolmesJr Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rogeroc Posted October 26, 2016 Share Posted October 26, 2016 23 hours ago, Happy Grumpy said: It's not over-charging foreigners, it's under-charging Thais, because they are poor. It is definitely not a discounted for locals / OAP/s etc system. It is a massive price hike for foreigners who have paid a lot of money to get to Thailand snd spend money in the country. Why try and defend the indefensible ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Grumpy Posted October 27, 2016 Share Posted October 27, 2016 11 hours ago, rogeroc said: It is definitely not a discounted for locals.... system. That's exactly what it is. Now it's free for all. Well done Thais! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cumgranosalum Posted October 27, 2016 Share Posted October 27, 2016 6 hours ago, Happy Grumpy said: That's exactly what it is. Now it's free for all. Well done Thais! You've completely misread the situation Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rogeroc Posted October 27, 2016 Share Posted October 27, 2016 7 hours ago, Happy Grumpy said: That's exactly what it is. Now it's free for all. Well done Thais! If the best a country can come up with to try and assist it's poorer people is to put massive price hikes on attractions for tourists (who are bringing income into the economy) it is not very impressive is it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Grumpy Posted October 27, 2016 Share Posted October 27, 2016 4 hours ago, rogeroc said: If the best a country can come up with to try and assist it's poorer people is to put massive price hikes on attractions for tourists (who are bringing income into the economy) it is not very impressive is it? It isn't more expensive for tourists..... it's cheaper for Thais...... So many Westerners here, always glass half empty, imaging things to get all a puff and a puff about. Sad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now