Abhisit Agrees Thailand Needs an Image Change

[admin]

Interesting story over at Hozpitality talking about the fact that while Thailand's number of visitors is increasing the yield per tourist is going down. Specifically, Abhisit said:

To me that means we need to attract higher yield, higher disposable income, higher spending leisure and business visitors.

The article goes on to make some points that I'm sure aren't going to shock many expats or tourists but seem to be the first time that people are openly discussing these issues.

However, macro statistics like this are increasingly misleading. Look closer and you'll discover that long-haul, long stay, higher spending visitors are being replaced by shorter stay mid-market visitors who spend less per capita per visit.

A new and unsustainable trend has emerged. The country has to run faster to stay still. Because more tourists stay shorter and spend less, Thailand needs to maintain double digit growth in arrivals just to match the preceding year's tourism earnings.

More hotel beds and airplane seats creates over capacity. Empty hotel rooms and low load factors are causing price dumping and desperate short-term marketing pitches to mass market suppliers.

The author notes:

Political instability, long queues at Suvarnabhumi airport, over-crowding and environmental degradation are also damaging the brand. Such all-too-visible problems are 'amazing' in the eyes of tourists who are used to high quality travel experiences in Europe, Japan, Australia and the United States. Thailand's brand is becoming more 'amazing' for all the wrong reasons.

Because of a toxic tom yam mix of political, capacity and branding issues, Thailand is witnessing the flight of quality to alternative destinations such as Malaysia, Vietnam, Sri Lanka and the Maldives.

he also goes on to say:

If you're going to build, stop building so many hotels and start building iconic mega projects.

Singapore bravely built the Marina Bay Sands, Universal Studios and added F1 night races. Hong Kong opened Disneyland and Ngong Ping 360. Malaysia has announced Legoland. Thailand has very little 'new' to offer except more amazing sales and discount prices. It's not a sustainable proposition.

Bangkok has added a skytrain, an underground train network and a new airport, all in the last 11 years. The country can deliver on ambitious goals when it acts as one.

Thailand really does seem to be caught between a rock and a hard place on this one. As the author points out, Thailand has to keep running faster and faster just to stay still. With almost zero investment in super-projects like theme parks and such that will pull in tourists with money to spend Thailand becomes less and less attractive as a tourist destination.

I think this "flight of quality" as the author terms it is made even worse because there's long been an attitude by people who service the tourist crowd that the tourists will just keep coming. There is absolutely no such thing as "the customer is always right," here. Who cares if you get pissed off? Another tourist will be coming tomorrow.

That might sound like I'm talking about the scams and ripoffs but I'm really talking about the desire for repeat business. I've stayed at hotels all over the world and for the most part the smaller they are the more they try to stay in contact. I still get emails from a bed and breakfast I stayed at on an island in Mexico nearly a decade ago telling me about what's going on on the island and inviting me to come back. I've probably stayed in two dozen different hotels in Thailand and have yet to get a single follow up email. Once I'm gone they don't care if I ever come back.

This is for farang and Thai owned businesses. It's just a mentality people develop. They start to believe that the tourists will keep coming no matter what kind of experience they have.

I think that until that mentality changes that will be the biggest hurdle for Thailand in regards to tourism.

[Seafra]

Admin you used to have a news tab in the old TF, where articles such as this would be linked. I would love to see this function back again ....

[admin]

It's in the footer. Under Thailand News and Weather.

[admin]

BTW, I did answer you when you asked this in another thread but you didn't check back for an answer.

[Seafra]

Thats right, I forgot where I had asked. Well thanks twice.

Regarding the article, I think that some of the reduced spend despite increasing number is down to a higher proprtion of Asian visitors. TAT have been plugging the Chinese (and other local) market(s), and, well, that it the consequence. Bus loads of khon Jin visiting Bangla Rd in Phuket, making the street appear jammed with people, but in reality thjey walk up and down, have a few snaps with the geezerbirds, and it is back on the bus.

Also, for every pissed off European who decides they are never coming back to Thailand, there seems to be 2 Russians to compensate. How long this will satisfy the cash lusty is unclear. Russians are just not seen in bars, golf courses and some of the other regular tourist venues/attractions. They are however big on the day tours, I was recently on one of the small beach-islands in Phang Na Bay, where 50+ commercial speed boats were moored, and they were all full of Russians. There wasn't an English speaker to be heard. It was not like this even 3 years ago in Phuket. Reds under the bed!!

[English_Bob]

I was at Flight of the Gibbon a few weeks ago and every other visitor was Russian. They'd even employed a Rissian guide.

'Repeat custom' is the key and Bill hit the nail on the head about the lack of following up. There are almost no 'What do you think?' service forms. Then there is a serious failure to accept criticism.

My staff for a long time, would get moody if someone complained - without checking if was justified. These days they are MUCH better. They check for guest satisfaction and, even on my day off, they will comp a beer or a starter for grumpy guest. At first they were nervous to tell me - but they now know I love it when they show initiative.

[Andy_bkk]

The author lists islands like singapore and hongkong as competitors, these are economically irrelevant for Thailand's tourism. Malaysia gets a Legoland! Wow, you see me frightened! If this generates a single dollar profit after 5 years of operation I would be surprised.

Thailand have one more Ace in the hand:

CHINA

If this markets really opens up and goes mainstream, affordable for chinese factory workers and other low income earners, Thailand will manifest its place as asians party capitol and Europe's Mallorca and gets swamped with tourists.

Thailand is already perfectly set up for low income earners and mass tourism. It is their market niche, a trademark.

There is no disney land needed there because these tourists Thailand is about to receive inject much more money into the economy than a couple of businessmen playing golf or wealthy families going to a theme park.

The real problem is with companies and factories leaving Thailand to neighbouring countries (+ other ASEAN countries like Vietnam), there is something that really needs to be taken care of, but thats another story.

[admin]

The author lists islands like singapore and hongkong as competitors, these are economically irrelevant for Thailand's tourism. Malaysia gets a Legoland! Wow, you see me frightened! If this generates a single dollar profit after 5 years of operation I would be surprised.

It's not about Legoland in Malaysia. It's about the fact they're trying. Thailand isn't.

And I don't think that Singapore and Hong Kong are irrelevant economically. At the end of the day people ask themselves, "Where do I want to go and relax for a bit?" They don't ask themselves if they want to go to an island or a land-attached. They're going for the overall experience. And if these other countries, generally in the same region, are trying harder to get the tourist dollars by providing stuff to do they're more likely to get those tourist dollars.

I mean, if you've got a family what's the attraction in coming to Thailand? Hong Kong has Disneyland! Singapore has one of the cleanest cities in the world and recently opened up a beautiful hotel/casino.

The kinds of people that stuff matters to are exactly the kinds of people who are willing to pay more. Las Vegas is a perfect example. When the focus was on building kick-ass casinos they had very little family traffic and the amount spent per guest away from the tables was trivial. The casinos made most of their money on the gaming. So they gave away the rooms at dirt cheap prices because they weren't making money on the hotel stay. They were making it once you dumped a few grand on the tables.

Once they started building these themed hotels and put more emphasis on attracting families by providing activities to do apart from gambling the spend per guest skyrocketed. Many casinos make more money on the hotel, F&B, etc than they do on the tables and they're making more than ever before.

I'm not necessarily saying Thailand should open up a string of casinos (though it probably wouldn't hurt, especially if they banned Thai nationals from entry so as not to create a gambling problem) but the parallels are there in terms of changing the experience and you change the type of customers you attract.

Thailand have one more Ace in the hand:

CHINA

If this markets really opens up and goes mainstream, affordable for chinese factory workers and other low income earners, Thailand will manifest its place as asians party capitol and Europe's Mallorca and gets swamped with tourists.

Thailand is already perfectly set up for low income earners and mass tourism. It is their market niche, a trademark.

There is no disney land needed there because these tourists Thailand is about to receive inject much more money into the economy than a couple of businessmen playing golf or wealthy families going to a theme park.

Actually, see the above about Las Vegas. I really have to disagree with you on this one.

For instance, here's something supposedly put out by the Thai government. According to this Thailand saw 1,127,803 Chinese tourists in 2010. Their average stay was 6 days and they spent, on average, 4,352.45 per person per day.

But there are well-heeled Chinese who are traveling and spending money. Just not in Thailand. According to The Sydney Morning Herald, Chinese coming to Australia spend, on average, $7,186 AUD (218,752 baht) per person. No info was given on the length of stay.

I know TAT saw these kinds of numbers and started drooling which is why they have made big announcements about luring in the Chinese and Indian markets. The only problem is is that so far they're getting the bottom of the barrel. To attract the spenders they're going to have to give them some other reason than "We have Thai food and beautiful beaches."

The real problem is with companies and factories leaving Thailand to neighbouring countries (+ other ASEAN countries like Vietnam), there is something that really needs to be taken care of, but thats another story.

It's also a problem with tourism as well. But since tourism only accounts for about 7% of GDP the more pressing concern is how to remain competitive with the rest of the countries in ASEAN.

According to Richard Barrow who indicates he was quoting something in the Bangkok Post, the average number of books read per year by Thais is 2 (I'm assuming this isn't mandated reading like in school). In Vietnam it's 60. Malaysia 40. Singapore 40 - 50.

Who do you think will be able to offer skilled labor more effectively in a decade from now? When I was in Vietnam last year you could almost smell how hungry they are for tourism and foreign investment. If I was looking to set up a manufacturing business, I would look very hard at Vietnam.

And they have lots of skilled labor that I have yet to find in Thailand. For instance, I regularly bid out graphic design, software programming, and other similar jobs on eLance. I nearly always get 1 or 2 bids from someone in Vietnam (most are from India and Pakistan) and have never gotten a single bid from anybody in Thailand. When I've hired them they've been nothing but professional, competent, and delivered on time. I have no reservations about outsourcing high-tech work to Vietnam.

I think 10 or 20 years from now Vietnam is going to be a serious contender for the hub of SEA.

[English_Bob]

I was having dinner with a couple of ministers and a relative of someone important... all of them were quite sure that casinos would be legal in Thailand within a few years.

There's a top-quality casino recently opened in Bangkok - it looks just like a Vegas club (albeit smaller), but someone has got real money invested in it and is quite confident it will stay open for several years. I was supposed to go and check it out last night, but couldn't make it. I'll have another go over the weekend.

If Thailand gets legalised casinos, that will be a HUGE pull for Chinese and other nationalities.

[Barbell]

The luxury tourism aimed only on rich people, it is possible to develop only in the territories removed from continent where there is no competition where there is not enough place where it it is difficult to reach and where it is possible to allow to dictate exclusive conditions. As examples it is possible to result Maldives, French Polynesia, Fidji, Seyshelles, archipelagoes near Papua. Thus, the luxury territory should possess following signs - inaccessibility (hence - transport monopoly), remoteness from continent, малонаселенность. Thailand does not correspond to these conditions. Here always it is possible to find inexpensive, but comfortable guesthouses and boutiques-hotels, massage salons and the markets, empty beaches. It is possible to construct, of course, "luxury island" or two, but it will be as exceptions. Therefore it is not clear that has in view of your prime minister. How he wishes to lift up price level of Chiang Mai, Krabi, Pattaya, Bangkok or Chang?

The prices gradually grow in Thailand and the tourist prices - together with growth of mass (!) tourism which also increases in Thailand will grow in the near future, but according to growth of a material prosperity. But this another.

Other moment. How, according to the prime minister, it is possible to reach these purposes (which it declares)? To forbid to trade to market dealers? To forbid to contain cheap and middle-price guesthouses, hotels and restaurants? To forbid rents motorbykes and mass entertainments? Then all owners of small and average business will move to Ratchadamnoen and Democracy monument.

In a result, in case of sharp rise in price of sphere of tourism in Thailand, the country will receive only outflow of tourists to his neighbor Cambodia.

Personally I do not gather in the near future to Thailand. I was there twice and I plan to visit other countries.

Edited March 12, 2011 by Barbell

[Barbell]

In general a theme interesting. Let's look - what alternatives to Thailand are? Personally I consider that, at all uniqueness of Thailand (it is at any country) many people, travelling every year or several times yearly only to Thailand, lose possibility to see other countries. On the other hand - in it too there is plus. In those countries where there are less tourists, there there is an sincere population, the virgin nature and so on.

[Barbell]

In general the price situation in the market to change from business, but no statements of the prime minister. I consider that it is blablabla, maybe before elections.

[admin]

You make some good points by using some very carefully selected examples but if you step outside of your construct I think the overall argument you're making doesn't stand up. In particular the author made the point that a hotel of the same quality as one in Singapore that costs $350 a night costs $150 in Bangkok. Singapore is very easy to get to. Or what about Hong Kong? Probably easier to get to than Bangkok and hotels are much more expensive there.

The question isn't how to bring $10,000 a night tourists to Bangkok. It's how do you get away from the $20 and $30 a night tourism. Part of that, again pointed out in the article, is to quit flooding the market with hotel rooms. Look around Bangkok and in every direction you see construction projects. It's difficult to imagine where all the demand is coming from. Especially in the middle and high-end ranges.

But the bigger point is that people aren't going to come and spend lots of money if there's nothing to spend it on. There are no theme parks so the majority of travelers are single men either alone or in small groups. Not a family who has 4 or 5 mouths to feed at every meal. They aren't going to care about staying in a decent hotel. They're fine in some $30 a night shack that they can take their bargirl back to in the evening.

Just look at everything Thailand promotes itself for. Temples? They certainly don't have a monopoly on temples. You can see gorgeous temples in Cambodia, Laos, and other parts of Asia. Beautiful beaches? Vietnam has them. Cambodia has them. India has them. The Philippines has them. There's nothing really unique to Thailand (in terms of what the Amazing Thailand marketing pushes).

Now, ask yourself in the billions and billions of dollars that tourists have left in Thailand, what has Thailand done to reinvest that money in order to attract new and hopefully richer tourists? Where are the theme parks? Where is the quick and efficient transport to destinations like Samui or other islands? Where are the urban renewal efforts to give a facelift to tourist parts of town like lower Sukhumvit? Why is the number one destination for every Bangkok tourist (besides maybe Nana or Cowboy), the Grand Palace, not accessible by the BTS or MRT?

The answer is that Thailand has done very little to give tourists a reason to come. They just whip up new ads and try to hit new markets (China and India). They'll keep attracting the same budget conscious tourists and have to keep attracting more and more of them to keep up with inflation.

The luxury tourism aimed only on rich people, it is possible to develop only in the territories removed from continent where there is no competition where there is not enough place where it it is difficult to reach and where it is possible to allow to dictate exclusive conditions. As examples it is possible to result Maldives, French Polynesia, Fidji, Seyshelles, archipelagoes near Papua. Thus, the luxury territory should possess following signs - inaccessibility (hence - transport monopoly), remoteness from continent, малонаселенность. Thailand does not correspond to these conditions. Here always it is possible to find inexpensive, but comfortable guesthouses and boutiques-hotels, massage salons and the markets, empty beaches. It is possible to construct, of course, "luxury island" or two, but it will be as exceptions. Therefore it is not clear that has in view of your prime minister. How he wishes to lift up price level of Chiang Mai, Krabi, Pattaya, Bangkok or Chang?

The prices gradually grow in Thailand and the tourist prices - together with growth of mass (!) tourism which also increases in Thailand will grow in the near future, but according to growth of a material prosperity. But this another.

Other moment. How, according to the prime minister, it is possible to reach these purposes (which it declares)? To forbid to trade to market dealers? To forbid to contain cheap and middle-price guesthouses, hotels and restaurants? To forbid rents motorbykes and mass entertainments? Then all owners of small and average business will move to Ratchadamnoen and Democracy monument.

In a result, in case of sharp rise in price of sphere of tourism in Thailand, the country will receive only outflow of tourists to his neighbor Cambodia.

Personally I do not gather in the near future to Thailand. I was there twice and I plan to visit other countries.

[English_Bob]

One thing that's always struck me is that one of Thailand's biggest attractions is the kindness and friendliness of its people.

And yet, in the areas most heavily populated by tourists, those characteristics are fast disappearing. When I lived in Phuket, I could barely believe the rudeness, greediness and violence I saw on a regular basis. These were just not the Thai people I was used to.

I can see how it happens - being surrounded by rude, ignorant tourists every day. But without their famed hospitality and charm, Thailand's tourist industry will suffer badly.

[Barbell]

2 Admin

Well first, comparison of Thailand with Singapore and Hong Kong the incorrect. We сравнимаем the countries, instead of cities (we compare Thailand and Singapore, but not Bangkok and Singapore). If Singapore was capital of the large country we could compare it to Thailand. But Singapore the small country - and it imposes certain restrictions for reception of tourists. Besides, to Singapore go not for beach rest, not for the nature. Hong Kong - too. Singapore has a brand of "city-fairy tale", "city-dream". And it justifies itself(himself). We cannot compare Singapore and Bangkok, because they in different categories. Hong Kong and Thailand is how to compare Los Angeles and the State of New Mexico (I exaggerate).

Therefore to compare Thailand it is necessary with similar on territory for natural and cultural conditions the countries SEA - Vietnam, Cambodia, Vietnam, Philippines, Burma. Laos not, because there is no sea, Malaysia - because the Muslim country, Singapore - because small territory.

Concerning that Thailand intends to be guided by tourists from India and China - i agree, in that case the statement of Abhisita is especially absurd. But there is no mechanism for a price barrier. And how the prime minister is going to satisfy discontent of small traders and owners of hotels?

[admin]

I was at Flight of the Gibbon a few weeks ago and every other visitor was Russian. They'd even employed a Rissian guide.

'Repeat custom' is the key and Bill hit the nail on the head about the lack of following up. There are almost no 'What do you think?' service forms. Then there is a serious failure to accept criticism.

My staff for a long time, would get moody if someone complained - without checking if was justified. These days they are MUCH better. They check for guest satisfaction and, even on my day off, they will comp a beer or a starter for grumpy guest. At first they were nervous to tell me - but they now know I love it when they show initiative.

The whole concept that "happy customers = repeat customers" has been lost on both many farang and Thai business owners in Thailand. It's sort of a bad side-effect of the "mai bpen rai" attitude. And you see this in people's attitudes towards business. It wouldn't be so troubling if you called people on things and they said "Ahhh, sorry. What can I do to resolve this situation?" It's that even if you call them on it they don't care. Or as EB says, they get moody or angry that they've been called out for performing their job poorly (even if that job is running your business).

And it's a snowball effect. The worse the quality or service the more customers just say "mai bpen rai" and lower their expectations. And maybe that works IN Thailand but Thailand is an export and tourism based economy. That means that the people importing from Thailand and those coming on holiday still have their high expectations and don't give a shit about mai bpen rai.

And to some degree that is exactly what the quoted author is saying. Thailand doesn't currently have the workforce to sustain a high-end tourism market. Outside of a few 5-star hotels and super-high-end restaurants and such Thailand's workforce and business owners don't have enough of a customer-centric mentality in order to support higher end tourism. People just aren't going to pay $300 - $400 a night for a hotel where the staff can't accomodate them in a way they are used to at similarly priced hotels elsewhere in the world.

It's not everyone. It's pretty obvious that there are people doing backbreaking work just to eek out a living. And there are a lot of upwardly mobile types who are trying to get ahead. But either there aren't enough of those types of people or they tend to work in professions hidden from most tourists and businesses people.

[admin]

2 Admin

Well first, comparison of Thailand with Singapore and Hong Kong the incorrect. We сравнимаем the countries, instead of cities (we compare Thailand and Singapore, but not Bangkok and Singapore). If Singapore was capital of the large country we could compare it to Thailand. But Singapore the small country - and it imposes certain restrictions for reception of tourists. Besides, to Singapore go not for beach rest, not for the nature. Hong Kong - too. Singapore has a brand of "city-fairy tale", "city-dream". And it justifies itself(himself). We cannot compare Singapore and Bangkok, because they in different categories. Hong Kong and Thailand is how to compare Los Angeles and the State of New Mexico (I exaggerate).

Therefore to compare Thailand it is necessary with similar on territory for natural and cultural conditions the countries SEA - Vietnam, Cambodia, Vietnam, Philippines, Burma. Laos not, because there is no sea, Malaysia - because the Muslim country, Singapore - because small territory.

Concerning that Thailand intends to be guided by tourists from India and China - i agree, in that case the statement of Abhisita is especially absurd. But there is no mechanism for a price barrier. And how the prime minister is going to satisfy discontent of small traders and owners of hotels?

First off, I don't think Abhisit said anything specifically about India and China. That was the tourism authority who has made big splashy announcements about targeting this "lucrative" market after the yellow and red shirt protests when farang tourists started staying away.

On the other stuff, I don't think you're making a good argument. If I want to take a holiday my choices don't have to be restricted by whether or not they have similar natural and cultural conditions as Thailand. For instance, if I'm taking the family on holiday I might want to check out the Marina Bay Sands in Singapore. Everybody seems to be raving about it and there's Universal Studios and other things I can do with my family. Thailand has none of that. It doesn't matter if Singapore has great beaches like Thailand because for my purposes, Singapore has satisfied my requirements.

And that's the point. Singapore will attract families who will spend money to spend a day at Universal Studios or for tickets to go see the Lion King or whatever. Those dollars will not come to Thailand because there's little in terms of world-class tourist attractions for people to visit in Thailand.

Yes, Thailand has some fantastic natural attractions like the mountains of Chaing Mai or the beaches but lots of other places have beautiful natural attractions too. Vietnam is a great example. Some of the best scuba diving in the region is in the Philippines, Indonesia, and Malaysia.

Oh, and don't be so quick to cut out Malaysia as a tourist destination because it's a Muslim country. I haven't been yet myself but I know plenty of people who have and I have yet to hear one person even comment on the fact that it's a Muslim country.

[admin]

2 Admin

Well first, comparison of Thailand with Singapore and Hong Kong the incorrect. We сравнимаем the countries, instead of cities (we compare Thailand and Singapore, but not Bangkok and Singapore). If Singapore was capital of the large country we could compare it to Thailand. But Singapore the small country - and it imposes certain restrictions for reception of tourists. Besides, to Singapore go not for beach rest, not for the nature. Hong Kong - too. Singapore has a brand of "city-fairy tale", "city-dream". And it justifies itself(himself). We cannot compare Singapore and Bangkok, because they in different categories. Hong Kong and Thailand is how to compare Los Angeles and the State of New Mexico (I exaggerate).

Therefore to compare Thailand it is necessary with similar on territory for natural and cultural conditions the countries SEA - Vietnam, Cambodia, Vietnam, Philippines, Burma. Laos not, because there is no sea, Malaysia - because the Muslim country, Singapore - because small territory.

Concerning that Thailand intends to be guided by tourists from India and China - i agree, in that case the statement of Abhisita is especially absurd. But there is no mechanism for a price barrier. And how the prime minister is going to satisfy discontent of small traders and owners of hotels?

First off, I don't think Abhisit said anything specifically about India and China. That was the tourism authority who has made big splashy announcements about targeting this "lucrative" market after the yellow and red shirt protests when farang tourists started staying away.

On the other stuff, I don't think you're making a good argument. If I want to take a holiday my choices don't have to be restricted by whether or not they have similar natural and cultural conditions as Thailand. For instance, if I'm taking the family on holiday I might want to check out the Marina Bay Sands in Singapore. Everybody seems to be raving about it and there's Universal Studios and other things I can do with my family. Thailand has none of that. It doesn't matter if Singapore has great beaches like Thailand because for my purposes, Singapore has satisfied my requirements.

And that's the point. Singapore will attract families who will spend money to spend a day at Universal Studios or for tickets to go see the Lion King or whatever. Those dollars will not come to Thailand because there's little in terms of world-class tourist attractions for people to visit in Thailand.

Yes, Thailand has some fantastic natural attractions like the mountains of Chaing Mai or the beaches but lots of other places have beautiful natural attractions too. Vietnam is a great example. Some of the best scuba diving in the region is in the Philippines, Indonesia, and Malaysia.

Oh, and don't be so quick to cut out Malaysia as a tourist destination because it's a Muslim country. I haven't been yet myself but I know plenty of people who have and I have yet to hear one person even comment on the fact that it's a Muslim country.

[PiAnt]

Thailand isn't a destination for high spending visitors; not more than once anyway. Apart from, maybe, a few exclusive resorts dotted about the place, there's no reason for anyone with high disposable income to come here.

Yes, of course there are some lovely beaches and inland places of natural beauty, but how long can you stay on a beach, or how many times would you want to? There are so many similar places elsewhere which also offer other attractions to add variety to the experience. Jetskiing and scuba diving notwithstanding, beach activities are beach activities the world over.

The biggest issue though is that the whole impression of Thailand is that it is cheap. Probably the most expensive side of a trip here is the flight. Whereas Bangkok is an experience in itself, how many times do you want to wrestle with the traffic, choke on the fumes, fanny for a taxi and get ripped off, trip over holes in pavements pushing past po-faced street traders and motorbike taxis occupying 80% of the width (when there actually is a pavement that is), and watch drunken louts and old twats dragging young bar girls around with them? Probably not many more times than once, certainly not more than once (if at all), if you have enough money to go somewhere else.

Changing the present situation to one which would appeal to discerning travellers with a bigger wallet is, I fear, beyond reach, and, unless there are some fundamental changes from the bottom up, it'll always be the low-end visitor who chooses Thailand for their return trip.

Edited March 14, 2011 by PiAnt

[Barbell]

I can be wrong, but my opinion - if you see that somebody trying to deceive you, it is not necessary to do reconciliation attempts, it is necessary to behave rigidly (but within the law). I know one person, asserts that irrespective of who is guilty, фаранг is obliged to solve the conflict peacefully, even to pay any sum of money. As a rule, it "hothouse people", naive people who look at the world through pink glasses. And they are among any nation. While many people will feel the certain not deserved sense of guilt invented by them, deceits from outside of the local will proceed. At the same time I do not love, when visitors without the reason behave in a boorish way and is offensive to local culture, towards to people.

[Barbell]

Admin, you have not understood me. I have excluded Malaysia not from the list of the tourist countries, and from the list of the countries which target audience is in many respects similar to fans of Thailand (for example, I know the person who was in Kuantan and he did not like local beaches first of all islamic atmosphere, unlike Thailand). Malaysia the fine country, with interesting national parks on island Borneo, with jungle Taman-Negara, with park of attractions near to Kuala Lumpur. But not for all. And I thank God that fans of alcohol do not go to there (I have no in view of my friend).

Beach... About beaches - it is possible to find good beaches in many places of the Earth. But unless there is in Vietnam an analogue of Andaman sea? It is there on Philippines is and it is better.

In Thailand special atmosphere, and many sit down to Thailand after the first arrival, especially for whom it is the first exotic country. For such people it is just necessary to expand the outlook. It is necessary to travel more.

I have returned recently from Serbia. It would seem, there there is no sea, the country far not most developed in Europe. But there there is something such that clings for soul, and there it would be desirable to return. I think, so with each country where the mass tourist is not developed.

Concerning welcoming to mass tourists after red shirts. I agree, there was an aggressive campaign. But Abhisit has proclaimed it.

Edited March 14, 2011 by Barbell
some words

[Barbell]

You know, at all my criticism, I love Thailand. I love even concrete hot Bangkok. Simply I am able to feel the country, a city, aura of the country (any country). Those to whom it is familiar, will understand me. Therefore I consider that Thailand, as well as at any country, has a specificity. But probably mass tourism levels this specificity. At the same time, I will tell frankly, I have negative opinion, maybe even hostility to mass package rest, I have not the morality right to refuse for somebody to go for rest to somewhere.

[admin]

Admin, you have not understood me. I have excluded Malaysia not from the list of the tourist countries, and from the list of the countries which target audience is in many respects similar to fans of Thailand (for example, I know the person who was in Kuantan and he did not like local beaches first of all islamic atmosphere, unlike Thailand). Malaysia the fine country, with interesting national parks on island Borneo, with jungle Taman-Negara, with park of attractions near to Kuala Lumpur. But not for all. And I thank God that fans of alcohol do not go to there (I have no in view of my friend).

Beach... About beaches - it is possible to find good beaches in many places of the Earth. But unless there is in Vietnam an analogue of Andaman sea? It is there on Philippines is and it is better.

In Thailand special atmosphere, and many sit down to Thailand after the first arrival, especially for whom it is the first exotic country. For such people it is just necessary to expand the outlook. It is necessary to travel more.

I have returned recently from Serbia. It would seem, there there is no sea, the country far not most developed in Europe. But there there is something such that clings for soul, and there it would be desirable to return. I think, so with each country where the mass tourist is not developed.

Concerning welcoming to mass tourists after red shirts. I agree, there was an aggressive campaign. But Abhisit has proclaimed it.

I don't think anybody is saying we dislike Thailand but what we're talking about is tourists with the means to go anywhere they want. Not the backpackers looking for 300 baht a night hotel rooms, 20 baht meals, and partying as cheaply as possible.

In that regard, I think Thailand has a difficult time making a case for why you should visit Thailand over some other countries in the region. All I'm saying is that before you start tourism campaigns designed to lure the more wealthy tourists you need to figure out if you even have the ability to accomodate them. If not, you're just setting yourself up for failure because the way Bangkok is today I can't see it being a destination that most people would want to bring a family to. This is why, by far, single (in terms of traveling alone or with a partner of the other sex) males are the highest percentage of tourists.

And again, the point is that most people don't say they want the most beautiful beaches in the world. Any beach will usually do. If you're really looking for those rare, post-card perfect beaches, you can go to the Maldives or into the South Pacific region and find places that Thailand beaches can't even hold a candle to. I love Thailand as much as anyone else but if I was only interested in the beaches I would pick Hawaii any day of the week. It's only six hours from the west coast of the US and Canada (compared to 12 - 14 nonstop, or 18 - 24 hours with layovers in Japan, Singapore, HK, or Taiwan).

It's also only about 5.5 hours for Japan (about the same for Japan -> BKK) and only a few extra hours for many parts of China. So if beaches are numero uno for you then Thailand is probably the high-end of the the middle-end of beaches. They're not the best. They're not the worst. They're okay. And if they're simply okay (compared to other, easy to reach destinations) then why not go there instead of Thailand?

This is why I'm saying that getting so caught up on the beaches while ignoring all of the other things people are looking for on holiday is bringing you to a biased viewpoint.

Lastly, you can drink in Malaysia. Alcohol is sold in tourist areas and can be purchased at specially licensed establishments, supermarkets, and 7-11's. It's more expensive than Thailand and you probably won't find places faunting the rules like they do here in Thailand but one can purchase and consume alcohol.

[CiaranM]

Lastly, you can drink in Malaysia. Alcohol is sold in tourist areas and can be purchased at specially licensed establishments, supermarkets, and 7-11's. It's more expensive than Thailand and you probably won't find places faunting the rules like they do here in Thailand but one can purchase and consume alcohol.

i was in KL for the first F1 race at the new (well it was new then) Sepang track ..... i reckon i drank more that weekend than anyother time !!!

i was living and working in Sri Lanka at the time and a group of about 6 or 7 came over for the race .... it was drunken chaos of the highest order .... and to make things even better Eddie Irvine won the race with Schumacher actually slowing down to allow Irvine to overtake him !!! Irvine was the number 2 driver at Ferrari at the time, but Schumacher missed a lot of the season with a broken leg and had no chance of winning the world title !!!

[koolbreez]

There are factors driving the high end tourist away from Thailand that people at all levels don't want to address. The regular demonstrations by the (pick your shirt color) factions are having a huge effect on high end tourism. That is what you see on the news all over the world about Thailand. No amount of positive advertising will offset this. A family will not spend the bulk of their time at a place that has the possibility of violence.

Beaches are what the majority of the poeple coming to Thailand visit, and the majority of people coming here aren't hanging out on lower Sukhumvit, and they are not single males. They are lower level families traveling on a smaller budget, staying for less days. They can afford to come here from their non-Western country because they have good paying jobs in their country now. That is good paying in their country, not good paying in terms of Western wages. They come from India, the Soviet block countries, Korea, China, But they are not the high end travelers from those countries, although some are. That is the bulk of the current traveler here. They are the ones that the Western countries outsourced their jobs to, at lower wages. The countries the Western owners set up their factories in because of lower wages. They are also the middle class workers that now can travel out of the bitter cold they used to have to endure in the long Winter because of heavy travel restrictions. They travel here because there is a risk, meaning prices are perceived to be lower.

To show the level some will go to to save money, a friend of mine runs guided tours, and he had a group of 7 from India one day. At all the places they stopped for refreshments, or to have lunch, all had brought their own food, and drink, to save money, even though lunch, and refreshments were provided. They expected a price reduction at the end of the day because of this. They wanted some money back.

The backpacker crowd has always been here, and they always will be, in the same basic numbers. This breeds high end travelers in the future. They will not be backpackers all there life (although just like everything in life, some will be). They are kids that have finished, or are finishing college, and taking a vacation for a few months, or a year. A portion of them will be the high end traveler in a few years. Thailand is foolish to discount them. You build future vacationers from them by making sure they have a good time. You don't rip them off, because they have a very good communication between themselves, and they remember for a long long time.

That is another thing Thailand is becoming more, and more known for, ripping people off. It happens in just about all tourist related business with dual pricing, unseen added costs to prices in restaurants (like the 10% added service fee that isn't clearly listed), theft by VIP bus companies, scams that are organized by the police, or allowed to happen because they are payed off, duty free shoplifting scams at the airport, the list goes on, and on, and on, with this all being authorized by the government by the simple fact they do nothing to stop, or regulate it. If you have enough money in Thailand you can open any business you want, and avoid any regulation that is required in that business, EB's example of another casino opening in Bangkok is a clear example. I've been in 3 different casinos in Bangkok over the years, and the police commanders were involved in every one of them. A police chief in one of the districts took me to one of them when he was in uniform...lolol.

There is no regular upkeep of the basic infrastructure to the businesses that are here for the tourist. They just get more, and more run down. The high end tourist requires that places be kept new looking, clean, and fresh, all the time. Too many of the foreign owners come here, and remodel once when they buy a business (most of the tourist businesses are owned by foreigners), and that is the last time they do anything to it. High end tourists don't require much, just safety, and cleanliness, and a fresh environment. They will do the same thing over, and over, and over, if they are taken care of, and that activity is kept up.

The level of service has fallen sharply in Thailand, and it isn't caused by the Thai's mai bpen rai attitude. It is caused by the management's uncaring attitude, and lack of guidance. I've seen this happen all over the world in different businesses. If you have bad management you have bad workers. You can not blame the drop in service on the workers, you can only point the finger squarely where it should be pointed, and that is at management. There are enough out of work people in Thailand that they will do whatever you guide them to do if you take the time to do it, and then manage them correctly. It's not rocket science. Most all of the management is foreign, and it changes constantly. How they manage is how the worker responds, plain, and simple. So many people come into Thailand, and buy a business with the attitude that it will run itself, and then when they find that it doesn't work that way, they hire a foreign "manager" that gets his work permit, but doesn't have a clue on how to manage, that's why he's out of work too.....lololol.

Having worked around the type of vacationer Thailand is trying to attract for the last 22 years, it's easy to see what is lacking, and no follow up is a huge part of that, but it has been addressed sufficiently. The big thing is that it is not the government that should be addressing the shortfallings, it is the businesses, but they don't care. The government is not the one that should be contacting a customer that had a bad experience. It is not the correct medium to contact a customer that had a good time, and personally invite them back.

The only thing the government has a responsibility for is keeping up the infrastructor, making sure the place is safe, trying to stop the crime, creating a friendly business environment, enforcing laws that are in place to protect the traveler, and supplying advertising dollars for large worldwide marketing efforts. They are not there to build anything business related, other than the infrastructure so that business can operate. They can create an environment to encourage the building of mega-projects, but the government doesn't to it themselves.

That is the other thing that Thailand is lacking in, and that is a friendly business environment. Thailand is considered the second most corrupt country to do business in. Everyone has their hand out, and it is not uniform. Vietnam has taken allot of Thailand's export business because it is a better environment to do business in. They welcome business with cost reductions in getting started. Something Thailand would never consider, and the visa system is a huge joke for a business owner to contend with.

The visa system is way outdated to benefit a long term traveler of any level in Thailand. They do not want a vacationer to stay longer than 60 days, and if you didn't get a visa before you got here, they do not want you to stay longer than 30 days. Then if you happen to come into Thailand overland they do not want you to stay longer than 15 days. How can Thailand complain about wanting long term high end travelers when they do not want them longer than 60 days at the most, or 15 days if they happen to come into the country overland?

There are just to many negatives for the high end traveler anymore. They know they ARE wanted in so many other places that are just as nice as Thailand. Thailand still has the best hotels, and the number one resort in the world, but that is not enough. The high end traveler expects safety number one, and fresh, clean, surrounding with frendly service number two. Thailand simply does not supply this anymore.

[Barbell]

Admin - I did not write that Andaman sea is the most beautiful. I had in view of South East Asia (except Philippines). To me faster and more cheaply to reach Red sea which is more beautiful. To Someone - to Hawaii or Caribbean Islands. I had in view of comparison of Andaman coast of Thailand in comparison with Vietnam, Cambodia and Malaysia. Plus in Thailand an infrastructure more developed, than in Vietnam, Cambodia.

In general, it is possible to do some preliminary results of the theme. As a whole the statement about necessity of rise in price of tourism in Thailand illogically and it will not lead to the necessary result. Its realisation will lead to unemployment and social protests.

Admin very well understands a theme and can give a practical advice to people.

But it would be desirable to hear more opinions. CiaraM - is visible that she has visited many places, but she keeps silent, it would be necessary she write more.

English Bob was noted, wrote that he does not like, but was gone. I consider that he needs to develop his thought. Where he will go to travel?

Kool Breez - I agree that in Vietnam it is more conveniently to develop business, than in Thailand, for farangs, and the visa longer. But we speak about rest.

Therefore let's discuss more actively here. And let us not depart from the main theme.

Edited March 15, 2011 by Barbell
some words