Why not read the quoted article instead of making up your own rules?!Originally Posted by Nirish guy
It clearly says two weeks solitary in your hotel followed by one week on Phuket island (within the province) before being free to travel to other parts of the country.
Hopefully they will have a solitary centre in Pattaya too.
dab69 (August 23rd, 2020)
According to what a few friends told me this morning, this new proposal covers Samui and a few of the others islands as well, not just Phuket. This is hear-say of course, but this will be interested to watch unfold.
If this thing does play-out (BIG IF), I would probably be inclined to come in as a long-term tourist (90 day stay with extension)....spend 3 weeks on Phuket, and then have 9 weeks in Pattaya, Bangkok, Chiang Mai, or where ever. It would be better than a stick in the eye.
You are already here Dodger; why be inclined to do otherwise?
According to an interview with the Transport Minister quoted in Bloomberg today this is just a “proposal” that’s “likely to be tested in Phuket”. As well as the mandatory 14 days in quarantine tourists will “probably be required to wear wristbands with GPS tracking”
Oh and it’s longer-stay tourists - that is you’ll need a visa, reading between the lines
If tourists have to spend 14 days in quarantine, then I guess the whole scheme is only likely to attract longer term tourists in any case. No one will do 14 days in quarantine for a 3 week holiday.
There is an advantage with longer term tourists, as 1 tourist staying for 90 days is lower risk than 6 tourists staying for 15 days.
If Thailand want to attract longer term visitors, perhaps they should make it easier to stay for 90 days. Currently, I think you need a 60 day visa, then visit immigration, pay 1900 baht and get an extra 30 days. They could just offer a 90 day e-visa.
I always get a 90 day visa before leaving the UK. Depends on circumstances .
It seems the Donald might have been on to something! Time will tell.
"A global shortage of remdesivir, one of the key Covid-19 drugs given to Donald Trump since he tested positive for the virus, is leading to rationing in the UK and pressure on the manufacturer to allow other companies to supply it."
https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...ing-remdesivir
Gilead has already licensed this drug. However, the licenses are only for distribution in 127 lower income countries. Obviously they are intent on recovering their R&D investment in higher income countries. It should not be difficult to license it for sale in other high income countries with a different license fee structure.
https://www.gilead.com/purpose/advan...for-remdesivir
Reply With Quote
