Bangkok int'l airport closed
N4790P
Sadly mis-informed is too polite!
You are all too correct with your assessment. This saga is far from over. However, next time the silent majority won't be so silent. Too many 'normal' people have seen their livelihoods go down the tube.
The opposing factions have done far too much damage for this country to recover from and there will be retribution if they attempt another airport occupation or anything similar.
The opposing elite have a lot to answer for.
You are all too correct with your assessment. This saga is far from over. However, next time the silent majority won't be so silent. Too many 'normal' people have seen their livelihoods go down the tube.
The opposing factions have done far too much damage for this country to recover from and there will be retribution if they attempt another airport occupation or anything similar.
The opposing elite have a lot to answer for.
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Leeds
Posts: 702
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You'd have thought Thailand doesn't want tourists to visit any more.
For anyone who's familiar with Thailand and who travels there often, you might be interested by the news that amid all the furore of the last 9 days, the Thai Ministry of Foreign Affairs has tweaked the visa exemption rule again.
Although it looks like you'll still be granted 30 visa exempt days when you arrive on a flight from beyond the SE Asia region (subject to the token 'proof of onward travel within 30 day condition' that they rarely enforce anyway), if you're arriving from a country in the SE Asia region - be it by air, sea or land - then you'll only now be given 15 visa exempt days at a time.
Typically vague. The bit about countries in the SE Asia region was initially thought by those of us who discovered this change to mean neighbouring countries, but seemingly folks have only been given 15 day stamps when flying into Thailand without visas from Vietnam and Indonesia, so it seems they're not just limiting it to their immediate neighbours.
The up-side is that there's no mention in the new rules of the '90 in 180' day cap for visa exemptions, so it looks like they're returning to the good old days of unlimited border runs, albeit meaning you now have to go twice a month instead of just once.
More hassle for those dive shop workers down on the islands. Bummer.
Folks are already reporting that all land borders and airports are now abiding by these rules, so it's a cert. There was absolutely no forewarning for those people who are travelling there now or in the near future who's holiday plans could be affected by this change.
Another bullet in the foot.
For anyone who's familiar with Thailand and who travels there often, you might be interested by the news that amid all the furore of the last 9 days, the Thai Ministry of Foreign Affairs has tweaked the visa exemption rule again.
Although it looks like you'll still be granted 30 visa exempt days when you arrive on a flight from beyond the SE Asia region (subject to the token 'proof of onward travel within 30 day condition' that they rarely enforce anyway), if you're arriving from a country in the SE Asia region - be it by air, sea or land - then you'll only now be given 15 visa exempt days at a time.
Typically vague. The bit about countries in the SE Asia region was initially thought by those of us who discovered this change to mean neighbouring countries, but seemingly folks have only been given 15 day stamps when flying into Thailand without visas from Vietnam and Indonesia, so it seems they're not just limiting it to their immediate neighbours.
The up-side is that there's no mention in the new rules of the '90 in 180' day cap for visa exemptions, so it looks like they're returning to the good old days of unlimited border runs, albeit meaning you now have to go twice a month instead of just once.
More hassle for those dive shop workers down on the islands. Bummer.
Folks are already reporting that all land borders and airports are now abiding by these rules, so it's a cert. There was absolutely no forewarning for those people who are travelling there now or in the near future who's holiday plans could be affected by this change.
Another bullet in the foot.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: somewhere in Asia
Posts: 162
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Off Topic
but interesting:
Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Kingdom of Thailand
for "tourist" workers a blow in their face!
Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Kingdom of Thailand
TOURIST VISA EXEMPTION
- According to the Interior Ministerial Announcements dated 1 October B.E. 2545 (2002), 20 December B.E. 2545 (2002), 18 October B.E. 2547 (2004) and 6 May B.E. 2548 (2005), passport holders from 40 countries and 1 special administrative region – Hong Kong SAR – are not required to obtain a visa when entering Thailand for tourism purposes and will be permitted to stay in the Kingdom for a period of not exceeding 30 days on each visit. Foreigners who enter the Kingdom under the Tourist Visa Exemption category may re-enter and stay in Thailand for a cumulative duration of stay of not exceeding 90 days within any 6-month period from the date of first entry.
- According to the Interior Ministerial Announcements dated 1 October B.E. 2545 (2002), 20 December B.E. 2545 (2002), 18 October B.E. 2547 (2004) and 6 May B.E. 2548 (2005), passport holders from 40 countries and 1 special administrative region – Hong Kong SAR – are not required to obtain a visa when entering Thailand for tourism purposes and will be permitted to stay in the Kingdom for a period of not exceeding 30 days on each visit. Foreigners who enter the Kingdom under the Tourist Visa Exemption category may re-enter and stay in Thailand for a cumulative duration of stay of not exceeding 90 days within any 6-month period from the date of first entry.
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Leeds
Posts: 702
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Apologies.
The officially translated new rules aren't up on the website yet.
However, a chap we know has done us an initial translation...
"A person holding a passport or other paper instead of a passport that has a citizenship that the Minister of State decreed in agreement with the Board of Ministers to let come into the Kingdom for a temporary period in order to tour according to the law and ordinances methodology and conditions of examination as "exempt" and to change the type of examination giving a stamp (year of) 2545 (day of) 16 of August (year of) 2545 Article 13)3) gives permission to enter the Kingom many times with a permision to stay in the Kingdom each time not more than 30 days counting from the day of entry into the Kingdom except that for an entry into the Kingdom by way of entry from a neighboring country the permission granted to stay in the Kingdom each time will not exceed 15 day counting from the day of entry into the Kingdom."
The 90 day in 6 month limit is no longer mentioned (the bit in red on the previous post), which is great. They only introduced that particular rule early last year and it's been nothing but hassle for their own immigration people because they had to sift through date stamps in cluttered passports and try to count up the total number of days a person spent in the country.
Those 90 days were counted on a cumulative basis, so whereas you were stamped in for 30 days, if you left again after, say, 4 days you did not lose the other 26 days. They would be held over, unlike when you leave having entered on a tourist visa where you lost any of your unused 60 days.
The relevance to this website is that it's probably gonna affect ground procedures for airlines in SE Asia countries that serve Thailand. They may require passengers to show their visas before boarding if they don't have proof of departure for within 15 days of arriving. Depends how vigourously the Thais will enforce the proof of departure rule (if at all).
I'll pop back on here when the official translation is up.
The officially translated new rules aren't up on the website yet.
However, a chap we know has done us an initial translation...
"A person holding a passport or other paper instead of a passport that has a citizenship that the Minister of State decreed in agreement with the Board of Ministers to let come into the Kingdom for a temporary period in order to tour according to the law and ordinances methodology and conditions of examination as "exempt" and to change the type of examination giving a stamp (year of) 2545 (day of) 16 of August (year of) 2545 Article 13)3) gives permission to enter the Kingom many times with a permision to stay in the Kingdom each time not more than 30 days counting from the day of entry into the Kingdom except that for an entry into the Kingdom by way of entry from a neighboring country the permission granted to stay in the Kingdom each time will not exceed 15 day counting from the day of entry into the Kingdom."
The 90 day in 6 month limit is no longer mentioned (the bit in red on the previous post), which is great. They only introduced that particular rule early last year and it's been nothing but hassle for their own immigration people because they had to sift through date stamps in cluttered passports and try to count up the total number of days a person spent in the country.
Those 90 days were counted on a cumulative basis, so whereas you were stamped in for 30 days, if you left again after, say, 4 days you did not lose the other 26 days. They would be held over, unlike when you leave having entered on a tourist visa where you lost any of your unused 60 days.
The relevance to this website is that it's probably gonna affect ground procedures for airlines in SE Asia countries that serve Thailand. They may require passengers to show their visas before boarding if they don't have proof of departure for within 15 days of arriving. Depends how vigourously the Thais will enforce the proof of departure rule (if at all).
I'll pop back on here when the official translation is up.
N4790P
B747-800
These regs have been in place for at least 2 years IIRC.
harrogate,
These new regs appear to be a way of deterring the illegal workers/visa overstayers doing visa runs to Laos, Malaysia, Cambodia and Burma. Can't see any impact on local tourists as ASEAN nations do not require visas and foreign tourists tend to enter from outside of these countries.
These regs have been in place for at least 2 years IIRC.
harrogate,
These new regs appear to be a way of deterring the illegal workers/visa overstayers doing visa runs to Laos, Malaysia, Cambodia and Burma. Can't see any impact on local tourists as ASEAN nations do not require visas and foreign tourists tend to enter from outside of these countries.
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Leeds
Posts: 702
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ZFT
You only need to look at the gripes of the folks on independent travel websites already to see the effect it's having. Yes, most tourists enter Thailand by air from beyond the region, but you cannot underestimate the sheer amount of re-entries these people make to Thailand. Thailand has traditionally been a hub for exploring the region, but it seems to be willingly shedding this role now, which is a big mistake.
As you probably know, lots of western travellers and gapyear kids (a sizeable section of Thailand's core tourist base) arrive in the region at Bangkok and then head out around the neighbouring countries to the east, before heading back into Thailand by air or land. Some fly on from Bangkok, and others work their way down to Malaysia, Singapore and occasionally Indonesia.
The new 15 day rule is forcing them to compress their time in Thailand on their re-entry. Getting multi-entry visas is the alternative, but they're often regarded as expensive by this kind of traveller and crucially they've also got a short activation period, so they're not particularly flexible.
Given the rapid rise in the cost of travelling in Thailand for Brits, Aussies and Europeans because of the naff exchange rates at present, added to the probably ill-informed but nonetheless very real fear that has been created by the PAD protests, Thailand is becoming a less attractive proposition. People are openly put off when you look around these travel websites.
The low cost terminals at KL and Singapore, coupled with their relatively slack visa requirements and the longhaul and Australian low cost links that are now starting to grow from these 2 airports, make them an ever appealing proposition over Bangkok.
The travel industry has been seriously looking into growing the offering and frequency for alternatives to Bangkok recently (which the PAD protest has justified), and I honestly think that Thailand will suffer because of the visa exemption change.
You're right that tourists aren't the target for these changes, but yet again the Thai government has pushed through an ill-conceived raft of changes with repercussions that they clearly haven't thought through properly.
I guarantee that next year will be a much worse year for tourism in Thailand than it need be. They're already gonna have a stinker because of the recession and the PAD protests, but to now restrict the options of a key section of their tourist base is just plain stupid. These tourists I'm talking about will spend less time in the country, of that there is no doubt. Not all of them are big spenders, but sheer numbers make them significant. The search is on for the Thai alternative while Thailand does nothing to defend its reputation as the focal point of the region.
It's about time Thailand introduced a multi-entry fixed term tourist visa, or pushed ahead with the plans for a regional visa with their neighbours.
You only need to look at the gripes of the folks on independent travel websites already to see the effect it's having. Yes, most tourists enter Thailand by air from beyond the region, but you cannot underestimate the sheer amount of re-entries these people make to Thailand. Thailand has traditionally been a hub for exploring the region, but it seems to be willingly shedding this role now, which is a big mistake.
As you probably know, lots of western travellers and gapyear kids (a sizeable section of Thailand's core tourist base) arrive in the region at Bangkok and then head out around the neighbouring countries to the east, before heading back into Thailand by air or land. Some fly on from Bangkok, and others work their way down to Malaysia, Singapore and occasionally Indonesia.
The new 15 day rule is forcing them to compress their time in Thailand on their re-entry. Getting multi-entry visas is the alternative, but they're often regarded as expensive by this kind of traveller and crucially they've also got a short activation period, so they're not particularly flexible.
Given the rapid rise in the cost of travelling in Thailand for Brits, Aussies and Europeans because of the naff exchange rates at present, added to the probably ill-informed but nonetheless very real fear that has been created by the PAD protests, Thailand is becoming a less attractive proposition. People are openly put off when you look around these travel websites.
The low cost terminals at KL and Singapore, coupled with their relatively slack visa requirements and the longhaul and Australian low cost links that are now starting to grow from these 2 airports, make them an ever appealing proposition over Bangkok.
The travel industry has been seriously looking into growing the offering and frequency for alternatives to Bangkok recently (which the PAD protest has justified), and I honestly think that Thailand will suffer because of the visa exemption change.
You're right that tourists aren't the target for these changes, but yet again the Thai government has pushed through an ill-conceived raft of changes with repercussions that they clearly haven't thought through properly.
I guarantee that next year will be a much worse year for tourism in Thailand than it need be. They're already gonna have a stinker because of the recession and the PAD protests, but to now restrict the options of a key section of their tourist base is just plain stupid. These tourists I'm talking about will spend less time in the country, of that there is no doubt. Not all of them are big spenders, but sheer numbers make them significant. The search is on for the Thai alternative while Thailand does nothing to defend its reputation as the focal point of the region.
It's about time Thailand introduced a multi-entry fixed term tourist visa, or pushed ahead with the plans for a regional visa with their neighbours.
Last edited by harrogate; 4th Dec 2008 at 00:08.
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: asia
Posts: 542
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It appears that these new regs may be designed to help airlines.
It seems you only get 15 days if entry by overland, but 30 days if by air.
In other words, come and stay as long as you like (no 90 in 180 rule) but you must make a flight every 30 days.
Good for business!
It seems you only get 15 days if entry by overland, but 30 days if by air.
In other words, come and stay as long as you like (no 90 in 180 rule) but you must make a flight every 30 days.
Good for business!
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Leeds
Posts: 702
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've already mentioned that the translation we have says that it's only 30 days for longhaul arrivals.
It appears that there's an explicit mention in the new rules that says all modes of entry from countries within the region will only get you 15 days - even air arrivals.
So to get 30 days each time, you'll need to arrive from a longhaul destination. Not sure how the low cost carriers in the region are gonna receive this. It's bad news for them.
You already got 30 days when you flew into Thailand from within the region, but now they're saying you'll only get 15 days when entering by air or land from a neighbouring country. Given the ever-growing costs of flying with the low cost carriers in the region when compared to the overland alternatives (which are good and efficient, on the whole), then it doesn't take a genius to work out that flying gives you no advantage and will cost you more.
If the translation we've been looking at is right, then this is most definitely not good news for regional carriers. The change doesn't affect longhaul operators at all.
From what I know about Thai immigration in recent years, this looks like a bungled attempt at trying to funnel people through airports rather than land borders. The 15 day allocation for air travellers arriving from within the region scuppers the plan though. I wouldn't be surprised if they either amended the rules for regional flights and granted 30 days for all flight arrivals, or just did their usual trick and didn't enforce the rules for air arrivals, even though on paper the rule still stands.
Clarity is not something they do well at all.
It appears that there's an explicit mention in the new rules that says all modes of entry from countries within the region will only get you 15 days - even air arrivals.
So to get 30 days each time, you'll need to arrive from a longhaul destination. Not sure how the low cost carriers in the region are gonna receive this. It's bad news for them.
You already got 30 days when you flew into Thailand from within the region, but now they're saying you'll only get 15 days when entering by air or land from a neighbouring country. Given the ever-growing costs of flying with the low cost carriers in the region when compared to the overland alternatives (which are good and efficient, on the whole), then it doesn't take a genius to work out that flying gives you no advantage and will cost you more.
If the translation we've been looking at is right, then this is most definitely not good news for regional carriers. The change doesn't affect longhaul operators at all.
From what I know about Thai immigration in recent years, this looks like a bungled attempt at trying to funnel people through airports rather than land borders. The 15 day allocation for air travellers arriving from within the region scuppers the plan though. I wouldn't be surprised if they either amended the rules for regional flights and granted 30 days for all flight arrivals, or just did their usual trick and didn't enforce the rules for air arrivals, even though on paper the rule still stands.
Clarity is not something they do well at all.
Last edited by harrogate; 4th Dec 2008 at 00:34.
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Far far away
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Watch out "farangs"
I have been living and working in Thailand for several months now and have been watching this scenario develop.Opinions are welcome from both pro & anti gov supporters there's plenty of ammo for both camps to dine out on.Having a perpetual corrupt government that bleeds a country dry dosen't help any more than protesters closing the main a/ports to try to bring change.Thailand like any country is feeling the big "C"..credit crunch!!I have local Thai friends who have businesses in tourist hot spots and have said already this year it is noticeably down on previous years due to the recession, so much so that a lot of them are closing down as they could not winter out the quiet period.I was down in Hua Hin the other day just for a short break and you could count the number of tourists on one hand, locals said it would normally be bustling by now, also the number of premises empty and up for rent is showing a grim but real picture. So be warned if you dare venture this far east for a holiday this year or next, don't think for a second that you will get a cheap deal when you land to help offset an expensive flight, you will be welcomed with open arms of course and they will greet you with a "sawadee" then they will decend on you quicker than a starving mosquito and relieve you of your hard earned cash quicker than Dick Turpin..but he at least had the good grace to wear a mask!!Pale faces you have been warned!!
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Leeds
Posts: 702
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Having seen a better translation of the new visa exemption rule (the official translation is still not available, which is disgusting considering the rules are now in force at all borders and ports and these changes are f*cking up the holidays of people arriving in the country as we speak), it appears that passengers arriving on all flights into Thailand - not just longhaul flights - are still eligible for the 30 day visa exemption (subject to the proof of onward travel within 30 days clause, which probably still won't be enforced anyways).
So it may mean that people wishing to leave and re-enter Thailand to get another visa exemption stamp will consider taking a return low cost flight to a neighbouring country now, rather than doing overland border runs, because all land border entries made without visas will only get you 15 visa exempt days at a time.
The ever-growing price of flights with the likes of Air Asia and Tiger will probably just make people think that getting a £28 tourist visa is the best option though.
I still think it's bad for the Thai tourist industry. Considering the ever-increasing cost of travelling within the region as a whole, the cost of short notice bookings even with low cost carriers compared to overland travel options, and the relative flexibility offered by the tourist visa and overland modes of transport as opposed to strict flight timings from a limited number of airports, I just think people will either continue to use land borders and curtail their time in Thailand, or buy visas and carry on crossing at land borders. The cost of the visa and overland travel is still a much cheaper and more flexible option than booking a return flight. The visa has the added advantage of permitting folks to stay for 60 days (and extend to 90 for a fee), as opposed to the 30 days offered by the visa exemption.
I don't see longhaul operators being affected much by this particular change (although travel to Thailand in general is gonna be hurt by the other things that have happened recently), but the low cost carriers are going to feel it I think. The continuation of the 30 day visa exemption rule for flights might be seen by savvy travellers as a ploy to get them to use airlines, but with the costs of travel in the region soaring I think more and more people are already seeing shorthaul flights within the region as being a luxury that they want to trim out in order to save on costs.
People scoff at the backpacker crowd, but they are undisputably the biggest tourist revenue generators in Thailand (it's official - the Thai government stats are available online if anyone's interested, and they are surprisingly comprehensive). As mentioned before, many of them use Thailand as a hub for travelling within the region, and between them they make hundreds and thousands of overland border crossings each year. You can't understimate their input into the Thai economy.
In recent years the search has been on amongst travellers and holidaymakers for the 'new Thailand', and this move won't help Thailand's plight at all. As air links to its neighbouring countries improve and drop in price, Thailand will suffer. People are already turning their backs on Thailand anyway, and tweaking the border rules like this has a further adverse effect. Thailand is gonna hurt badly soon anyway, considering they are an export economy that relies heavily on the US for trade.
This rule change risks making tourists resent travelling to Thailand, and is certainly already pissing off a large section of its key tourism base. I don't think it will benefit the regional airlines one bit.
There's a bit of snobbery going on surrounding this issue. Some folks are saying that the change to the visa exemption rule is a good thing, because it forces people to get the 'correct documentation' (i.e. visas) together before travelling to Thailand. There seems to be an ill conceived argument that getting visa exemptions is somehow an underhand thing to do. It's not. That's nonsense. Entering a country on a visa exemption is obviously completely legitimate by design. Even leaving and re-entering multiple times to continue to take advantage of the benefits of it is perfectly legitimate too. Some people seem to suggest that 'playing the system' like this is deviant. It's not. It is the system - not an abuse of it. Visa exemptions exist for that very reason - to make certain people exempt from having to get a visa. The cap on the amount of days you can spend in Thailand under the visa exemption rule ensures that the system cannot be abused.
So it may mean that people wishing to leave and re-enter Thailand to get another visa exemption stamp will consider taking a return low cost flight to a neighbouring country now, rather than doing overland border runs, because all land border entries made without visas will only get you 15 visa exempt days at a time.
The ever-growing price of flights with the likes of Air Asia and Tiger will probably just make people think that getting a £28 tourist visa is the best option though.
I still think it's bad for the Thai tourist industry. Considering the ever-increasing cost of travelling within the region as a whole, the cost of short notice bookings even with low cost carriers compared to overland travel options, and the relative flexibility offered by the tourist visa and overland modes of transport as opposed to strict flight timings from a limited number of airports, I just think people will either continue to use land borders and curtail their time in Thailand, or buy visas and carry on crossing at land borders. The cost of the visa and overland travel is still a much cheaper and more flexible option than booking a return flight. The visa has the added advantage of permitting folks to stay for 60 days (and extend to 90 for a fee), as opposed to the 30 days offered by the visa exemption.
I don't see longhaul operators being affected much by this particular change (although travel to Thailand in general is gonna be hurt by the other things that have happened recently), but the low cost carriers are going to feel it I think. The continuation of the 30 day visa exemption rule for flights might be seen by savvy travellers as a ploy to get them to use airlines, but with the costs of travel in the region soaring I think more and more people are already seeing shorthaul flights within the region as being a luxury that they want to trim out in order to save on costs.
People scoff at the backpacker crowd, but they are undisputably the biggest tourist revenue generators in Thailand (it's official - the Thai government stats are available online if anyone's interested, and they are surprisingly comprehensive). As mentioned before, many of them use Thailand as a hub for travelling within the region, and between them they make hundreds and thousands of overland border crossings each year. You can't understimate their input into the Thai economy.
In recent years the search has been on amongst travellers and holidaymakers for the 'new Thailand', and this move won't help Thailand's plight at all. As air links to its neighbouring countries improve and drop in price, Thailand will suffer. People are already turning their backs on Thailand anyway, and tweaking the border rules like this has a further adverse effect. Thailand is gonna hurt badly soon anyway, considering they are an export economy that relies heavily on the US for trade.
This rule change risks making tourists resent travelling to Thailand, and is certainly already pissing off a large section of its key tourism base. I don't think it will benefit the regional airlines one bit.
There's a bit of snobbery going on surrounding this issue. Some folks are saying that the change to the visa exemption rule is a good thing, because it forces people to get the 'correct documentation' (i.e. visas) together before travelling to Thailand. There seems to be an ill conceived argument that getting visa exemptions is somehow an underhand thing to do. It's not. That's nonsense. Entering a country on a visa exemption is obviously completely legitimate by design. Even leaving and re-entering multiple times to continue to take advantage of the benefits of it is perfectly legitimate too. Some people seem to suggest that 'playing the system' like this is deviant. It's not. It is the system - not an abuse of it. Visa exemptions exist for that very reason - to make certain people exempt from having to get a visa. The cap on the amount of days you can spend in Thailand under the visa exemption rule ensures that the system cannot be abused.
Last edited by harrogate; 4th Dec 2008 at 15:35.
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Far far away
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tourism in trouble
Quite correct Harrogate in what you say, but which ever way you play the visa rule will depend very much on what your intentions are when your down here, but I fear it will still put a lot of potential travellers off coming to Thailand. Seasoned backpackers are a canny lot and will be looking for another hub to use which will give them better service and at a more desirable cost. Thailand has I think for the time being lost it's way and to a certain extent lost it's unique appeal. The once must see jewel in the east has let it's crown slip. The usual coastal resorts have milked the trailer trash tourist to death and have nothing more to offer than another bar and a "short time sir"The more seasoned traveller looking for a cultural holiday can find that elsewhere in the surrounding countries without all the problems of Thailand in the back of their minds. Thailand is hurting right now and next year it will get a lot worse, the country is at the beginning of a credit crisis which has yet only one way to go and that is down hill, with the tourism trade on the brink of collapse thousands of thais will be out of work, revenue will take a huge blow and that will only add further problems to a government already in serious trouble itself. I'm not sure if it will survive in the short term, quick thinking strong policies and strong leadership are required at the moment to offset a collapse.. unfortunately all sadly lacking at the moment!!
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: asia
Posts: 542
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Please excuse me if this is thread drift, but for anyone wanting to know more about the problems in Thailand there is an excellent article in the Economist
Thailand, its king and its crisis | A right royal mess | The Economist
Thailand, its king and its crisis | A right royal mess | The Economist
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Far far away
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Abscent king
Sorry off-thread again I know but....Just as a point of interest the King has on every anniversary of his birthday made a public address to the people of Thailand, not missing a single year in 60+yrs of his reign, however yesterday he was said to be suffering from a throat problem and feeling a little sick and so unable to make his usual speach this year.This coming from his son the crown prince must be a little worrying for the people considering the affection that they have for the king and monarchy in general. This coupled with his abscence during the political crisis must be more than a little disconscerting!!
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,208
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think because of this crisis TG will reduce frequencies 
http://airlineroute.*************/20...-new-0809.html
http://airlineroute.*************/20...ork-as-of.html
http://airlineroute.*************/20...-new-0809.html
http://airlineroute.*************/20...ork-as-of.html
[QUOTE] /The cost of the visa and overland travel is still a much cheaper and more flexible option than booking a return flight. The visa has the added advantage of permitting folks to stay for 60 days (and extend to 90 for a fee), as opposed to the 30 days offered by the visa exemption.[QUOTE]
The last time I did this, it made no difference - I still got a 30 day stamp on arrival - despite protests from mrsr1 (Thai). So it was a waste of time & money. Am leaving again in a couple of weeks - staying for 40 days, so will do an overland run at Mae Sai - will let you know how it goes...
The last time I did this, it made no difference - I still got a 30 day stamp on arrival - despite protests from mrsr1 (Thai). So it was a waste of time & money. Am leaving again in a couple of weeks - staying for 40 days, so will do an overland run at Mae Sai - will let you know how it goes...
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Far far away
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Visa nightmare.
I am married to a Thai, live in Thailand and have our own business in Thailand. I have a one year multi-entry visa issued in London, when you enter Thailand they will only grant you a stay of 90 days, then you have to do a border run for a passport stamp for another 90 days!! Where's the logic in that.. other than it's a bl**dy good money making scheme for the immigration/government services, you also have the added expense of having to purchase a visa for the country you are entering only to immediately turn around and pay a re-entry fee to come back in all with a smile on your face!! Surely one year should mean one year?? You don't hear of people entering the UK with a visa already issued for an extended period only to be told you have to exit and re-enter within the expiry date on numerous occasions.
Arrived a few days ago with a visa - queued in the Thai passport line, and lo! got a 60 day permit !!
Qantas were terrible - 2 hour delay in NZ due to "sudden" notherly wind change, and consequential "redistribution of freight and baggage" on the 737 WLG-SYD. Missed the connection, but rebooked on Emirates flight the same night (good) and arrived in BKK 2 hours late but no baggage (despite assurance). Bags arrived 24 hours later... no compensation offered, though we had to buy underwear etc....
Qantas were terrible - 2 hour delay in NZ due to "sudden" notherly wind change, and consequential "redistribution of freight and baggage" on the 737 WLG-SYD. Missed the connection, but rebooked on Emirates flight the same night (good) and arrived in BKK 2 hours late but no baggage (despite assurance). Bags arrived 24 hours later... no compensation offered, though we had to buy underwear etc....
