INTRODUCTION

What others say

"Post Bag" is the part of the Bangkok Post where our readers can express their opinions. You can find it almost everyday in the "Opinion and Analysis" section. As you might expect some of the letters are from tourists writing about their experiences – good and bad – during their stay in Thailand. Many other letters come from foreign residents of Thailand and they, too, have a lot to say – again, both good and bad – about the country.

You will be happy to learn that many letters are quite positive about Thailand and the people who live here. That is the case with the letter below. But is it all positive? Does it contain any information that surprises you? Does the letter contain any useful information for Thai people to know?

Another great stay, pity about the taxis

We have just returned from "Amazing Thailand" after 10 fairly relaxing days in Bangkok. Our stay at Marriott Royal Garden Riverside Hotel was full of the usual good service and thoughtfulness in spite of the current economic crisis. Most of our encounters on the streets or at the shops of Bangkok were friendly and helpful. Therefore, we wish to encourage the persistence and high morale of the Thai people so that Thailand does not lose heart in its drive to revive the economy.

The "Amazing Thailand" campaign should have been more widely advertised. We did not know until we reached Don Muang. During this critical period for Thailand, the taxi drivers should be ashamed of their illegal and destructive practices. Although we had some very good drivers, most of our encounters with taxi drivers were bad experiences. If the TAT wants a successful tourism campaign, it had better get the relevant authorities to crack down on the rascals masquerading as taxi drivers.

After having visited Thailand for the past 15 years and seeing this fine country achieve spectacular growth, we were worried by the recent economic and political turmoil. However, the past 10 days in Bangkok have given us hope that Thailand will have the strength and perseverance to recover. We hope all Thais support the current reforms under way and do not forget the painful lessons. Furthermore, we hope all Thais continue to smile in the face of adversity.

Phil & Linda Leiby
Taipei, Taiwan

Unfortunately, many of the letters we receive from foreigners are complaints. Below you will read an example of one of the most common complaints of all. It is so common, in fact, that it appears to be one of the biggest "pet peeves" (something especially annoying) of the foreign community here. It is an very interesting complaint, however, and one which could easily create some disagreement among you and your classmates. Some of you may agree that it is a problem which requires a change. Others of you may think the complaint is unfair. Read the letter and decide for yourself.

Stop dual pricing

The photo caption below the picture of a tourist taking a canal boat ride Bangkok Post, (Dec 28) noted that the trip cost 50 baht for Thais and $2 for foreigners. That means foreigners pay, at the current exchange rate of 50 baht/$, some 100 baht for a trip that costs Thais just 50 baht. This is certainly not the only case of dual pricing: many hotels, temples and other facilities charge much higher rates for foreigners than for Thais.

Nevertheless, such dual pricing is a rip-off that, once the word gets around, will harm the "Amazing Thailand" tourist promotion campaign. This sort of greed and lack of professional ethics is part of the cause of the mess in which Thailand has now sunk. The government's tourism officials should take action to stop the dual pricing rip-off before travel agents and tourists take their own action - by avoiding Thailand.

Unamused Farang

Next, I am going to prove to you this issue is indeed a pet peeve among many foreigners here. In the next section are three more letters on the same subject – all written within the last eight months. Read them carefully and consider the ideas they put forward to support their point of view. Do you find anything that causes you to change the opinion you formed after reading the first letter?

I'll never get used to dual pricing

I have been a resident here in Thailand for 10 years so I have overcome my shock at the idea of entrance prices to national parks, monuments, entertainment parks, etc, being higher (usually five times higher) for foreigners than for Thais. I do not agree with this policy not because of the amount of money, but I would feel sorry if a Thai friend visited the Tower of London and had to pay five times more than myself. We are guests in this country and so should be treated with courtesy (i.e., not over-charged).

I have recently visited Buri Ram, Phi Mai, Phetchabun, Phitsanulok, Chiang Rai, Chiang Mai and Tak. There are wonderful national parks to be seen, but after driving hundreds of kilometres to reach these remote waterfalls or sites, it rubs it in to see the five times pricing. The negative impact can detract from the Amazing Thailand ideal.

The weekend newspaper showed a tourist enjoying some noodles on a boat trip on the launch of Amazing Thailand experience. He paid $2 for a 5-baht boat ride, lucky chap. I find it Amazing that the TAT still seems to support these schemes. The campaign to attract foreign money to refill the coffers is understood, but how many visitors go away upset about the principle of pricing? The effect of foreign tourists visiting such sites should be considered as I am sure they tell five friends of their good times, but TAT and other government agencies, please remember the visitors probably tell 25 people about the negative parts, such as dual pricing.

Can the Thai authorities not consider that this campaign could be supported by treating their foreign visitors to prices the same as Thais? This will, I am sure, bring in more foreign exchange in the long term. Good luck to Amazing Thailand and I hope the visitors go away happy and not with any negative feelings.

Fred Axtell, Samut Prakan

During the Songkran holiday my six- and eight-year-old children urged my wife and I to take them to Safari World in Bangkok. In order to find out the entrance fees, I asked one of my children to telephone Safari World: Thai adults pay 250 baht, foreign adults 400 baht, Thai children 150 Baht, foreign children 200 baht.

My eight-year-old girl asked me why the difference. The conversation basically went like this: "You have to pay more because you are foreign." After an explanation of the word foreign, she said: "But we were born in Thailand and Mummy's Thai." "No, you're still foreign even though you were born in Thailand and Mummy's Thai. You're foreign because I am foreign. I was born in Scotland. This makes you foreign, and so you have to pay more than Thai children who were born in Thailand." "But we are Thai and British, and we were born in Thailand."

I succeeded in confusing both children as well as myself. Anyway, it gave us a chance to talk about what is right and wrong, honest and dishonest, before going back to playing hide-and-seek (a children’s game). Needless to say, we didn't go, and shan't ever be going, to Safari World, and we all agreed to that.

I feel, however, that Bangkok Post could perform an invaluable service by once again giving negative publicity to such companies in an effort to make them change their ways, and also to help foreign fathers who have to explain to their Thai children why they are foreign when they are not.

Peter McAlpine

One might ask why this practice is carried out in Thailand, and who benefits from it? I understand it's supposed to bring equity to Thai people who are expected to have less money than foreigners. It also perpetuates the idea that Thai people are supposed to make less money than foreigners. It gives business owners an excuse for paying their employees less. If these are Thai-owned businesses, the owners not only have lower costs in running their business, but also get the lower Thai price when making their purchases. As a result, poor Thais who this policy is supposed to help suffer with lower wages on the erroneous premise that the Thai price makes up for it.

The last time I stayed in a hotel in Bangkok, I paid about US$100 (5,000 baht) a night. I became acquainted with the front desk manager and discovered that she made only 15,000 baht per month. I paid the same $100 per night in a San Francisco hotel where the front desk manager made more than $3,000 (150,000 baht) a month -- ten times more. Both hotels had nearly identical prices for goods and services.

In spite of what Thai people think, prices here in the US are frequently less than they are in Thailand. For example, my unlimited access to the Internet is $20 (1000 baht) per month. I have a cellular phone that was free, and after a $40 (2000 baht) annual charge, using the phone costs me 12 cents (6 baht) a minute with no monthly fee or minimum charge. My new 27" stereo TV cost less than $300 (15,000 baht). I can get a Burger King Whopper for 99 cents (50 baht).

I can imagine the outcry if we in America singled out Asians by charging them 50 to 100 percent more for goods and services than "White" Americans pay. The practice is clearly racist and would be illegal here.

Finally, to answer my own question: "Who benefits from the Thai/foreigner dual pricing practice?" Obviously, well-to-do Thais benefit the most, but at the expense of their image and the international image of Thailand.

Don Fehr
Oregon

Clearly each of the writer’s feels strong about the idea of dual- or two-tier pricing. But each has different reasons. First, briefly summarise the reason each gives for opposing dual-pricing. Then decide which, if any, of the reasons you find to be convincing. Perhaps, however, you disagree with some of the arguments given. Explain your disagreements.

If you have regular access to the Bangkok Post, look at the Postbag section over the next few weeks to see if you can find other letters from foreigners commenting on something they have experienced while in Thailand. Make a list of the topics they write about. Do any of the letters contain constructive (useful) criticisms?Are you convinced?

Teacher’s Note

This lesson is almost guaranteed to led to some interesting and useful discussion. It is interesting because it discusses a common business practice in Thailand – charging one price for Thais and another for foreigners. This your students can easily understand and many of them probably the practice, especially in the difficult economic circumstances we find ourselves in. It is useful because it gives your students direct exposure to the foreigner’s point of view.

Begin as usual with the introductory section. I suggest you discuss the first letter with the class. Note that (1) it was written by a tourist, (2) it is largely positive and (3) it contains two criticisms – the first of the promotion for the "Amazing Thailand" campaign and the second of the behaviour of many Thai taxi drivers. Hopefully, your students will agree that these are useful criticisms. Find out if they have any suggestions for making changes.

Then consider the next letter. Have your students read it and discuss it among themselves, ideally in very small groups. Then let them give their opinions. I suggest that you don’t comment on their opinions at this time.

Next assign them to read the three letters in the next section. I suggest you do this as an "information gap" activity. You will remember that this means dividing your class into groups – in this case in some multiple of three (3 groups, 6 groups, 9 groups, etc.) with each group considering one letter. Then regroup your students so that each group has members coming from groups that have read all three of the letters. First have them share what each of the writers said and then have them consider the issue of dual pricing. Finish with a class discussion on this topic.

•This lesson was prepared by Acharn Terry Fredrickson, BA Stanford, MA (TESL) University of Minnesota, Manager of the Educational Services Department at the Bangkok Post and general editor of this programme. This week Acharn Terry also had the help of an energetic group of university teachers plus a group of university students.