Quote:
|
Originally Posted by chucky66
Hi geespot.
No Im now back in Singapore (on work business) but I spent 4 days in Phuket last week and was on samui before that. Despite low occupancy in many hotels on Phuket I failed to experience any drop in rates during my stay.
If you look at the gulf side of things (samui, phangan etc). They are benefitting tremendously because of the tsunami. According to my own observations and TAT numbers occupancy over there are up to very high levels. In response there have been large increases in hoteliers charges for accomodation. This is exploitation of the worst kind but also is business. The two are linked and I dont argue this. Hoteliers in Thailand have always charged far more during busy periods than quiet periods.
My point was that at the moment in my opinion the likes of Bali are not pushing up prices to account for any increase in tourist numbers they are receiving as a result of the tsunami. Nor did they keep prices at normal levels following the bombing in 2002 when tourism dropped to an all time low.
|
Hi chucky66
I can see you point here, but in all fairness it is the tourists who are willing to travel to places like Samui etc and possibly pay more due to increased demand for accommodation, and whilst there have been reports of places in phuket decreasing rates, the east cost is experiencing an increasing shortage in availability of accommodation.
You mentioned exploitation in you post, but i don't feel that this would be the best word to use here, as the definition of exploitation reads as "an act that exploits or victimizes someone (treats them unfairly)", so as per the definition we must ask ourselves "
are people being exploited"? In a sense not really, as people are not forced into paying these increased prices, people
choose to pay these prices (there is a difference).
Some may call this exploitation; others may argue that this is a prime example of the economic principle known as Supply and Demand. Places on the east coast like Samui are experiencing huge increases in the number of tourists wanting to visit, so from an economics perspective, this was inevitable.
As you stated in your post that Bali had decreased prices after the bombings, my reply would be that Bali was a different story, you
cannot compare an act of terrorism to a natural disaster and the effects that it will have on tourism. people will at first be deterred from places like Phuket, Kao Lak etc, but for completely different reasons to people who were deterred from Bali.... it will take time, but people will venture back to Patong.
In my opinion this would not be considered "desperate exploitation of tourists" just merely business practice..... After all we all have a choice to pay these prices or go somewhere else.
