On foreigners retiring to Thailand

 

The idea of possibly retiring to a lower cost of living country comes up in online discussions.  It relates to people identifying that US social security isn't enough to live on, and that their own retirement savings seems a bit thin.  The numbers you see vary, but per a quick check with Google 40% of all Americans have no retirement savings, and that only reduces to 20% for Americans over 50.

This isn't about all of that.  It's not even about complications in living abroad, although I will start with that theme, to explain what may not work well, or why it wouldn't work at all for some people.  I wanted to explain what retirement tends to look like in Thailand, how people tend to live.  Obviously I'm drawing on online communicated stereotypes and discussions; I don't know all that many retired people.  But for many it's a complete blank, and I want to help fill that in, since I've been living in Thailand for awhile (about 18 years).  Of course scope will be narrow, just thoughts or range that comes to mind, in part related to questions that come up.  Like these:

How developed is Thailand?  What do different areas look like?  Do expats / foreigners tend to live in "enclaves," or not?  What are different area options, versus just city, rural, and beach or island based?

Let's start with the problems.

Difficulties / problems

Oddly a visa isn't one of them.  With sufficient savings or proof of income anyone can get a retirement visa in Thailand.  I suppose if someone is quite poor meeting these minimums could be a real hurdle, if they are living on zero savings and social security.  But for many it would just relate to issues with proof, demonstrating that security with or without pulling out funds to place in a Thai bank for demonstration purposes (which might be required).

If someone isn't retirement age (I'm not sure the cutoff) they might have a different problem, since they probably wouldn't be eligible.  Thailand offers other visas, for investors, or shortcuts if you pay extra.  I suppose from there someone could try a work-around instead, to get an education visa to go to a low cost institution, whether they are really studying or pursuing an educational goal or not.  

Thailand continually weeds out people manipulating visa channels, using them improperly, but there would still be exceptions to work with.  It would be for the best to not rely on "work arounds" that involve cheating the system though.  People of different ages could take part in different forms of education, and in Thailand it might be broad enough that you could learn muay Thai or cooking, versus being in a degreed university program.  It's crazy how inexpensive and broadly themed vocational education options are in Thailand, but that applies a lot more to Thais, and foreigners would need to do a lot of research.

Communication both is and isn't a problem.  Enough people speak English that even out in rural areas you could manage transportation and buying food and such, with essentially no Thai language skills.  But it would make for an uncomfortable life experience, only learning a few basic words.  Speaking a few hundred words, even badly, would go a long way.  That's not that difficult.

In the short term society seeing you as an outsider might not be so negative, but in the long run it may not feel comfortable.  The US forms of racism or bias against immigrants isn't copied over; it would take another factor or two for someone to get beat up over it.  So this leads to the potential "enclaves" or expat gathering center theme I'll get back to, about people gathering together around others with similar background, to experience a limited and very local familiar culture, which I'll cover related to how that works out by area (in a few cases; none of this is comprehensive).

Missing home is the real issue.  Lots of people love the differences in an early honeymoon period.  New foods can seem fantastic, and low cost of living really freeing.  Problems that you would expect not coming up, the racism theme, could seem like more acceptance than it really relates to.  Romantic options could seem open (more for guys, and that tends to take a pay-for-play form, whether that's explicit or not).  But lots of familiarity is also missing.  Driving is more difficult, for awhile, and food options aren't the same.  Interactions with government systems are difficult, for example getting a driver's license, which you can do.  Beyond any of that it can get old being an outsider.  Or I suppose anomalies would come up, like someone not tolerating hotter weather well.

Different locations

Pattaya:  the sex tourism capital; for one type of transplant this is the obvious choice.  There's not much more to add about that.  Some people claim that Pattaya is really fine for living a life that's not based around that, but it's really all over the place there.  You could appreciate Western food or decent medical care options there instead, and I suppose if you lived in a quiet and out of the way part the sex industry might not come up much.  But in general if you are there it's for that.

Phuket:  this other main resort area might provide a better balance for people not so focused on the sexpat theme.  It's an option in places there, but it looks and feels like a normal island resort too.  There is a "downtown" part, and shopping, dining, and medical care are probably all fine (I've experienced the first two, on visits, just not hospital visitation).  There are a number of muay Thai gyms there; I suppose some few older guys, or women, might take up training to stay in shape.  Beaches are a little cleaner and more conventional than in Pattaya.  You can visit Rayong and go out on snorkeling outings not so far out of Pattaya too, but Phuket is more what one would expect for an island or seaside resort.  Our kids took surf lessons there on a visit once.

surfing in Phuket; I'm sure it would get better than that at times, in other places

recently in Waikiki; conventional sized waves, that can get a lot bitter

It's interesting hearing about how there are too many Russians in some places, or whoever else, increasing crime rates.  People who spend lots of time in bars tend to pick up a different perspective than I'd ever have.  It's nothing like Mexican cartels making some places unsafe.  Older guys do tend to die a bit often in Pattaya, per a favorite online story line, but it's probably more related to suicide than due to others' choices, even if both happen regularly.  

All of Thailand is pretty safe.  Drinking every day is a much higher risk than foul play.  This is just my take, but it seems like the darker the aspects are related to your lifestyle the more your risks escalate.  People doing illegal drugs bring risk on themselves, for example, and even more by drug dealing.  There's a favorite story line about foreigners being taken advantage of just for investing a lot of money, especially related to marrying a Thai, and I suppose if a lot of money is at stake potential risks could increase.  Trusting random people with millions of baht is probably a bad idea.

Isaan:  this is really where a lot of older guys end up, and a much smaller proportion of female retirees.  It's a great place to lead a quiet life.  The harsh, sometimes true story of a foreigner building a house in his wife's name, and then being cheated out of everything, must happen from time to time, but in general many more people must just lead quiet lives instead.  Foreigners can't own land, which could lead to those circumstances, having property and a house in your wife's name.  Or renting could work.

I think people just love those stories, and there is no story if some guy lives out 20 quiet years.  Probably in some cases the real details about someone experiencing ordinary misfortune aren't interesting enough, so that gets spun into something else.

One downside of Isaan life could be that it's pretty quiet there.  It's not different than in rural areas anywhere else.  That could sound good to someone, and could be experienced as very positive, then a year or two later it might not seem as pleasant and balanced.  I remember meeting local expats in a hotel gym / spa area once, talking a little about how life goes out there.  They didn't make it sound bad, at all, but there was a sort of desperation related to any mention of boredom.  To be clear where I'm from, in rural Pennsylvania (the US), it would be worse.  There aren't small communities on the same scale as nearby, just mostly small towns and tiny villages, and almost no one is moving there from anywhere else.  The one upside, related to the US, is that the roads are a little better, so you can travel further at a faster pace, so it all balances back out.

They have small local markets and food courts in different places all over, but you can tell this is Bangkok instead by the elevated highway.  Apparently I don't take that many pictures of normal markets when we visit smaller towns, but I do have others.

a Lopburi monument (there would be things like this in lots of places)

inside that monument.  what remains in places varies a lot.

all of those monkeys are all around you outside, and on the streets.

a sidewalk fruit market there is pretty typical.

Thai history goes back to the stone age, with interesting stages in between then and now.

Roads are pretty decent in Isaan, but it's all relative.  The main highways aren't like US interstates, and "country roads" can be a bit basic.  It doesn't seem unsafe to me, driving in rural Thailand, but you have to pay more attention, and adjust speed for conditions.  It goes a lot better than you might expect, but at the same time longer distances take a bit more time, compared to road travel in the US.

this could be lots of places, but I think it's in Trat

One might wonder what is out there, beyond farms, and small towns.  Temples, of course.  Plenty of parks, and some museums.  Historical areas turn up here or there.  It's funny how often expats complain of dual pricing, of paying more to enter natural areas and parks, but I suppose if you were going to them frequently paying 300 baht ($10) instead of 30 could seem a bit insulting, especially if you pay a lot more taxes than most Thais.  I don't know that it's mostly about the actual expense.  

They do the same thing here, in Hawaii, and visitors from anywhere else pay to go to some places that are free to locals (Hawaii residents).  I get it; the idea is to protect your local residents from experiencing costs meant to be imposed on visitors.  And that seems to be the rub for resident expats; they see themselves as local residents.  But they're not Thai.

Bangkok / Chiang Mai:  I was going to list out lots of places foreigners tend to live in Bangkok, but this is already running long.  It's possible to find that out online.  As I see it Chiang Mai is fairly comparable to Bangkok, maybe just better for being a little bit less of a sprawling mess, even though their traffic was already bad enough a decade ago, and must be much worse now.  

where I run around a palace in Bangkok.  I'm not going to show much of the city though.

a canal area on the walk to a local market near our house (in Bangkok)

a temple on the way (of course)

these drainage canals are cool, but can be a little smelly

Let's run through where some expats live in Bangkok though:

Udom Suk:  one main transplant hub, on "deep Sukhumvit," that might be called, versus lower Sukhumvit.  Suhumvit is the main road in Bangkok, essentially, running east and west with a N / S tilt to it.  This is on the far side, out east, and south, towards Bangna.  The areas are summarized as BTS (skytrain) stops; really the two stops on either side of Udom Suk aren't so different, since they're not that far.  There would be plenty of apartment complexes there, and restaurant options, with lots of it local in character (cheaper, more casual).  Even further out there are other areas, including Bangna, and foreigners would end up living all over the place.

Tong Lo / Ekamai:  the next level closer to a center of the city, but there is no singular center.  Maybe the Siam BTS stop area is more like a center, but it's not that.  These are trendier, and probably costlier areas.  Further on yet Asok is a main intersection area, again still on Sukhumvit and that BTS line, maybe as much the main center for expats to live as anywhere else.  There's a red light area beside Asok, Soi Cowboy.  I'm not sure that's the primary reason for its popularity; there is a lot of things right there, including a main mall (Terminal 21), a few shopping areas, a nearby large park, and so on.

These places would be more costly, but you could still find ordinary apartments around there for 20 to 30,000 per month, I think ($600 to $1000 USD).  High rises with a pool and gym would probably run on the high side, but there would be other kinds of options.  Other costs of living would still be kind of low.  It's a little hard to summarize what I mean by that, since running through costs for food, groceries, different kinds of restaurants, gyms, and so one would make for a good 1000 word summary.  You can buy a bowl of noodles for not very much all over, $1 or 2.  Groceries never cost that much.  In restaurants more oriented towards a higher end or more foreign clientele costs rise, but it's generally nothing like where I am now, in Honolulu, where $30 doesn't go very far to get something to eat.  You could spend that at Subway, and not get much for it.

There's a Japanese expat area near Phrom Phong, not far from Asok.  I don't keep track of those sorts of separate foreign origin areas, but of course Chinatown has connections back to China, and there's a little India, of sorts.  There is Middle Eastern influence around the Nana area, which contains another red light area.  Those red light areas tend to be a bit self-contained, so someone could live 100 meters outside of one and not really be that affected by it.  That's because it's not really an illegal business, even though in one sense it may not be fully formally sanctioned.  That part is complicated.

Siam:  people don't tend to live here.  There's no zoning for what can be built where, but more commercial areas tend to not include that much housing.  There would always be small apartment complexes not too far away, or a more pricey highrise kind of resident option almost anywhere.

Sathorn / Silom:  these are nice areas, beside each other.  Silom is also pretty commercial, but it's a decent size place, so there would be places to live around.  Sathorn is more a central business area and a residence area (it's much bigger; it has different sections).  There's no reason that Thais couldn't live in any of these places, but in general the local people we know are based from where their family had lived, or else they've moved into areas that seem a little more like suburbs, further out.  I've worked in Sathorn and Silom and most people had long commutes to get there.

Nonthaburi:  outside of Bangkok there are small areas where foreigners live, more of an enclave theme than what I've been describing.  Some might be in Nonthaburi, or at least a friend happened to live in such a place there.  There are very small complex areas where foreigners live within the city center too, for example not far from where the embassies tend to be.  I don't have much to add about such places.  Visiting one comes to mind, and it was nice how it was a small gated community (very small; maybe 15 small houses), with limited yard space for kids to play in.  That kind of standard form of a US suburb isn't common in the center of the city though, and may occur a lot more often a little further out.  Over by the airport my wife's close friend lives in such a complex. 

Sub-culture themes

There's an interesting divide between expats who pride themselves on integrating, and others who love Thailand but don't try to change themselves or their own lifestyle to fit in better.  It's all good, either way.  Of course people who are fluent in Thai, eat local foods, have local friends, and "get" the local culture can tend to express that's better.  Maybe I'm in the middle, even though I live in a Thai family, work in a Thai company, and was ordained as a monk at one point (as an example; that doesn't prove anything).

Expats can link up with other expats and still live a relatively local lifestyle, or naturally be introverted and somewhat isolated and still live a lot like a Thai.  Or they could pick and choose, and eat foreign foods, but play soccer (football) with Thais, and so on.

It comes up over and over that Thais aren't generally seeking out including a foreigner in their social circle, that it's hard to be fully accepted.  I suppose there is a perspective of foreigners being outsiders, which would take some effort to overcome.  Language issues would be part of that.  In the end foreigners do often find ways to link up with others, through sports themed groups, professional societies, or informal special interest groups.  If an expat is sort of passing through, only spending a few years in Bangkok, or elsewhere, it would just be easier that way.

It's interesting how some things are really simple and easy in Thailand, even more so than in the US, and other things are pretty difficult.  Maybe getting a driver's license is an example of a system designed to not work well in both places.  Medical care is pretty straightforward in Thailand, compared to in the US.  Quality of medical care varies, but plenty of that applies in the US as well, just less so.

Some pretty basic themes, like having someone cut your lawn, tend to work out better through personal contacts in Thailand, not so much whatever the modern equivalent of using yellow pages is (Google search?).  Lawns aren't so common in Bangkok; I mean across the rest of that scope, like getting treatment for termites.  My wife has so many personal connections with people who fix clothing, help around the house, are a better than average vet option, and so on.  There are always different ways to do different things, but some may not work out well.  Something easy, like being able to use a local pool to swim laps, may seem tricky, even though after you put the work into investigation multiple options would turn up.

It's for the best to avoid any involvement with Thai laws.  If you open a business you can't, of course, but foreigners would have very limited rights to do that, so it would be tricky to (and costly, but it is possible, with Thai partners).  I mean that you need actively observe cultural norms that overlap with legal issues, like not defaming others' public images online.  In the US you can do that, but not so much in Thailand.  Noise ordinances seem a bit less rigid, but again as an outsider you don't want to test those kinds of limits.  If your neighbors are really loud it's better not to follow suit.

Maybe these kinds of sub-themes could add up to not feeling at home, not knowing where all of the norms and restrictions lie.  It's atypical for men to walk around with no shirt on, but can you?  Probably, where it makes sense, but it's better not to.  

Transplant residents tend to not live in fear of violating the next norm, since Thais are pretty open and flexible, but different people would end up pushing it in different ways.  One former expat once gave me the advice that eventually I would have someone draw a weapon on me, which related entirely to how he was living, that it had led to that.  I'd have to think hard to recollect anyone speaking in an unkind manner, never mind anything like that.  But if you transplant your entire worldview and set of behaviors with you, instead of minding fitting in, maybe odd things could come up.

Another expat told me that after a few years I would equally not fit in anywhere, and I suppose there is something to that too.  I'm an outsider in Thailand and the US now, even though I feel at home in both places.

The difference between blogging in support of tea vendors and shilling

 

This subject just came up, related to an odd pretense, just recommending a vendor.  It was on Reddit, where someone took offense that I had kept recommending Tea Mania, a Swiss vendor who sells pu'er, Wuyi Yancha, Taiwanese oolong, and Japanese teas.  The problem?  It seemed biased, to them.

Never mind that case, the complaint; there was nothing to that.  But it's an interesting sub-theme, how a blogger, who aims to be objective, deals with having favorite vendor sources.  I can unpack that quite a bit.  

It seems best to do so in discussion of my favorite vendors, explaining what my bias is, and why I see myself as still objectively "reporting" tea impressions in their cases.  Maybe not all of that works; it's up to a reader to decide for themselves.  I'll cover the different related factors along with that form, vendor by vendor, starting with a few favorites.

Jip Eu tea shop in Bangkok:  the owners are like an extra uncle and aunt to me.  Of course I would try to help them, even if my experiences there hadn't been as positive, related to their teas, and the value they're sold at.  But the broad range of interesting versions and great values are the main point.  It's why I settled into visiting them more than everywhere else in Bangkok combined, related to buying tea.  I have mentioned other places, summarized here, I just don't go to many very often.

first meeting Huyen!  8 years ago.  she would be my favorite vendor, if she sold tea.

I've already covered the bias, that I like visiting with them.  Related to product diversity I've tried different teas almost every time I've visited them, a count that is in the dozens now.  Who knows how much I've not identified that is available there.  I found brand new--to me--aged sheng versions there in the last two years, that had long since been there, and I've been buying similar aged sheng from them for nearly a decade.  

They specialize in Wuyi Yancha, both good versions and very inexpensive blends, that typical better-than-it-should-be dirt cheap Shui Xian (which would be called Da Hong Pao in some places, but they just go with what it actually is).  Their tins of medium grade Dan Cong are good, and it's a great place to buy either good jasmine pearls (white tea) or inexpensive jasmine green tea.  There are gaps; black teas aren't well represented, and oddly they don't sell almost anything from Thailand.  And it's hard to shop there, harder for others than for me, since they won't just sit and try everything in the shop with you (with friends, sure, but it's not like that for walk-ins).  There is no product list.

I know what these teas are, and what the market values are, and they're all pretty good, related to quality and value issues.  Maybe value and quality are hit and miss, which gets back to the "hard to shop" theme.  I am usually describing the positive side, but I've expressed that it's hard to shop there many times in this blog.  They just ask what people want, instead of talking through the options.  I suppose that's fair, since it would be a long talk covering it all.

Wuyi Origin:  this is a very well-respected producer and direct online sales vendor of Wuyi Yancha, based in Wuyishan, China.  I've never met Cindy, one owner, but I consider her a friend.  That almost covers it; there's no need to justify how good their teas are, or where value stands with them, because searching Wuyi Origin in any online tea group would turn up a list of endorsements.  Their teas are pretty far up the scale, and lots of people are familiar with that.  

I suppose there would always be something slightly better, or a style that's a better match to some preferences, but I sometimes recommend against people starting with their teas because they're too good.  You could never go back and appreciate that Chinatown shop Shui Xian if you explored their teas at first.  

In this case I don't feel it's necessary to say a lot about potential bias in online writing, and I've not been writing about their teas for years anyway.  I moved on to drinking sheng pu'er, and mostly order Thai, Laos, and Vietnamese teas, to maximize value.  Chinese teas can be slightly better, and value relates to quality related to cost, so that's one half of the equation, but for people on a tight budget the second part really matters as much or more.  

I mention them here because it's an example of a personal bias, and I did need to consider and try to address that in a lot of earlier reviews.

Tea Mania:  the source of the trigger for this writing.  I do know and like the owner, and he has contributed teas for review a number of times, but to me it's really about their teas.  Even when my tea budget was limited--it has been, for awhile--at one point this vendor was the source for my main annual order, stocking up every year.  I probably should get back to that, but I've been on a SE Asian tea tangent for who knows how many years, maybe about 5.  Really for 15, since I started on that, but I mean in relation to it being most of what I buy.

a 2016 cake reviewed in 2018 (my photography and sheng background were a little rough)

What's so great about their teas?  One Yiwu cake line represents some of the best value out there for pu'er (Lucky Bee).  And they sell more gushu / higher cost versions, that are significantly better.  Those other tea type ranges are really solid (Taiwanese oolong, Wuyishan teas, and Japanese teas).  So quality level is as high as "curator" vendors often offer, with pricing more in a conventional small vendor range.

Unless I'm judging all of that wrong there isn't more to explain or to justify.  They sell really good tea for below market rate costs.  Not far below standard pricing, but at a good value (except for that Yiwu; that level of value is atypical).  

One more caveat:  a number of vendors have contributed teas that are better than I typically buy for evaluation and review, so I'm not basing my own judgment on a broad range of routine purchases at a high cost level.  I don't buy 50 to 80 cent per gram pu'er; I can't afford it.  I've placed three small tea orders in the last two months, which my wife might already freak out about, which represents about as much tea as I've bought over the last year and a half (for myself; I do routinely buy tea for gifts, which is something else).  All of that tea was a bit below moderate in cost; it was cheap.

So how do I know that I can judge "gushu," dollar per gram range sheng fairly?  Reviewing is always about working with whatever impression you have, based on whatever background.  I've tried lots of different kinds of teas, from different sources; it would have to do.

Trident Bookseller and Cafe:  this isn't the same kind of theme.  I know the one owner of this business online, and like him, and he has sent tea to try once.  I recommend them as a good curator source; they seek out the best of the best kind of range, and sell that at way below a normal price, for what those teas are.

But it is odd, recommending people buy tea through an online outlet hosted by a cafe.  It makes sense, because of what I've described.  In trying those teas, only one set, I couldn't have been more convinced that every version was the best I'd tried of those standard types (Longjing and such).  

I don't think there is the body of endorsement comments out there in groups confirming this; people who know know, and most others don't, and people tend to "gatekeep" good sources.  They're not really trying to blow up as a main vendor source anyway.  They already sell books, and coffee, and tea on-site, so the online outlet is for profit but also for playing a broader role as a source.

I'm not overly sensitive about my image as possessing an ideally reliable opinion, in case that's how this is coming across.  People can think that I am biased, and "out of pocket," as my son says; it's all the same to me.  People who know know.  I expect that not everyone's subjective preferences and value judgment would match mine; that would be normal.  In the loosest possible sense I suppose that I am a tea expert, but that's not at all how I represent myself.  I'm a tea enthusiast who tries different things, and also likes to write.  Every experienced tea enthusiast realizes that there are a lot of thinner spots in what they've experienced; it's just how that works.

Viet Sun:  I wanted to keep this mostly to vendors that I'm buying tea from, since that makes the most sense (even though Trident was an exception to that).  I've bought more tea from Viet Sun over the past few years than anyone else.  It might seem that I've went quiet on that, since really tightening my budget last year involved skipping that order.  I bought a little in Chinatown, and from one "local" Thai source, and that was it.  I think I'll skip mentioning Aphiwat here; he's as much a favorite source as any, but you can search that in this blog to find a half dozen related posts, tied mostly to Thai sheng.

Steve and another friend covered Vietnamese tea market status here

Viet Sun is a unique vendor.  For a time Hatvala was the only Western-facing, good quality, great value Vietnamese source.  Or maybe only the Western facing part is enough; it was where you could get tea from Vietnam, and it just happened to be good tea that was moderate in cost.  Viet Sun expanded that and shifted range, to much better Vietnamese sheng and black tea.  

I did just order some tea from them, checking out this year's versions, so I'll write plenty of posts expanding on that over the next six weeks or so.  There's a pattern where unheard of new range is inexpensive at first, and slightly inconsistent, and then as consistency and demand ramp up so does cost.  The days of Vietnamese teas being an amazing value could be winding down; the original production level pricing also increases, as awareness and demand expands, which is fair.

On that quality side, maybe this level of Vietnamese sheng didn't even exist a decade ago.  I tried a pretty good version nearly that far back, from a Hanoi shop, so it probably did, but there wasn't much, and it was almost impossible to find.  Now it's not.  

If I'm wrong about all of that then I'm wrong.  But I've tried about as much South East Asian sheng as anyone alive, so that would have to relate to a bias working out much differently than I expect, or my overall judgment being wonky.

Could it be?  Sure, why not?  Once or twice a year someone will confirm that their preferences match mine, and I've been a huge help to them, but that's not much validation or feedback given my posts are viewed many thousands of time per year.  My judgment must also conflict with some others.  

Those views are mostly by bots, probably, but my guess is that around 10,000 views per month might be people, or at least 5,000, and then an order of magnitude more are AI bots, at this point, more than 10 times that many.

This is not an airtight case for me being completely objective, is it?  I don't think it works that way, that any one person can strip out their own judgment from their experience of tea.  I think that people can get better and better at placing their perspective within the landscape of others', but there would be limits to that.  I'm not claiming that I'm exceptional at it.  My guess is that I'm as successful as people tend to be on average, who put in moderate effort, but for sure others with different strengths and more deliberate or dedicated approaches can do better.

I get the sense that even from a source that means a lot to me personally I can still judge a tea fairly, in the same way I would if bought at random, or sent by a vendor source for review.  Or maybe that's not quite right.  We tend to like what we expect to like; it just works out like that.  We can zoom in on positive aspects or flaws and limitations in experiences, without noticing doing so.  It's probably impossible to accurately score yourself in relation to this factor.

I'm going to mention one more factor related to my "policy" of reviewing teas, to help place my approach.  I review what I like, not what I dislike.  You would have to go back pretty far here to find a tea that I describe as unpleasant.  

I'll cite an example, where I would do that:  I reviewed tea fossils and resin, two forms of instant tea, awhile back, and I don't really like either.  That was here, in 2024.  Looking back one was from a friend, and one from Tea Mania, a sample contributed for review, and I pretty much said that I didn't care for it.  

Here's an excerpt from that review, starting with the Tea Mania cha gao (tea resin):

[about the cha gao]:  I can't say that I like it.  There are redeeming characteristics, but it's rough, harsh.  Of course very heavy mineral dominates it; one might expect that.  It tastes like drinking rainwater condensed down to a brown liquid after sitting out in a plant pot, reducing there.  A pine note isn't bad though, and it lacks a lot of the disagreeable character of cheap shou.  It's not a lot like peat, it doesn't include off earthy flavors, or fishiness, and so on.

I diluted it again, and it's slightly better, but it's still going to taste like that, so heavy on mineral tones.  It's not so close to the flavor range of shou pu'er, but of course it is closest to that.  I overbrewed some Fu brick tea recently and this also reminds me of that.

tea fossils:  it's better, but only in comparison with the other tea.  I wouldn't drink this.  I will drink these cups; I tend to not waste tea, but I mean there's no way I would purchase this, or repeat this trial to check if other versions are better.  Related to the experience being novel it is quite interesting though...

So that's it; I will only review a tea I don't like if the flaws are interesting enough to warrant it, if there is a story.  If a pu'er just misses for you, or a black tea is missing a dimension or two, then there's no story.  It's bad tea, per your subjective tastes.

On the other theme I pass on as objective an opinion as I happen to have in reviews.  I've always wondered how that's affected by expectations, but we don't really get to know that, about ourselves.  To a limited extent we can work around that using blind tasting, which I've mentioned recently, but that's kind of a different subject.

Recurring tourism themes in Hawaii and Thailand

 

not really on a bus tour

Not so long ago I ran across an article on Hawaiian tourism that expressed that visitor spending was stagnant, or perhaps even dropping.  This repeats a theme that comes up in Thai media regularly over the last 20 years, that they would prefer to attract a better, higher spending class of tourists, at times expressed as a more important goal than attracting more tourists.  I'll unpack a bit what I think is going on with both.  It's not exactly the same thing, but not different either.

The initial response is pretty obvious:  inflation has been rising in both places, quite quickly in the US over the past few years, and faster than previously in Thailand recently, so the same tourists are finding it difficult to match spending habits just a decade ago.  That's probably most of it.  But we can unpack it a bit more.

Starting with Thailand

The earlier problem there was tourism related to tours, framed as zero-dollar tours by Chinese tour groups, although that's probably only one main form.  Articles like this cover the general background, tourism statistics, and the emphasis on attracting higher spending visitors.  This reference from 2025 covers the same themes.  

This article introduces the topic, and the relation to the Tourism Authority of Thailand:

TAT Governor Thapanee Kiatphaibool said the 2026 direction shifts towards “Value Over Volume”, after weaker foreign demand was hit by factors such as natural disasters, scam-related concerns and the Thai–Cambodian border dispute, which affected travel sentiment and forced a more proactive marketing approach.

Targets: 36.7m foreigners, 205m+ domestic trips

One might wonder how they could adjust who visits; that first article cited mentions one idea:

“We’ve set the outline for TAT to accelerate tourists’ decisions by offering tailor-made tour packages that will match segments with high spending. For instance, the medical tourist segment, who book long-stay accommodation for themselves and their families, should have tour package options to purchase easily while in Thailand,” she said.

That doesn't sound very promising; people can already make arrangements with a foreigner oriented hospital and book a hotel room.  It's already easy.  The hospitals already offer a lot of different packages, related to bundling sets of services (eg. health checks, or longevity related treatments).  I guess marketing could relate to promoting these themes, and raising awareness about the special packages.

I've been on such group / bus tours in Japan and Korea, so the form is familiar to me.  You buy a trip as a package, including transportation (air travel), hotel stay, guide service, and even meal costs, which the tour provider arranges in advance using group rates, so that they can still turn a profit.  It's an inexpensive way to travel.  The trade-off, as a tourist, is all of your freedom.  You get on and off a bus and see the places on your itinerary, limited to the time they allot.  You eat what they plan for you to eat, and stay where they arrange for you to stay.  You need to wake up and sleep at pre-determined times.

The Chinese tour group form isn't really different than what I experienced, in mainly Thai groups (my wife had set that up, based out of Bangkok).  The food was often better than you might expect for such a format, since they arranged decent versions of local foods.  It's a mindless way to travel, getting on and off a bus, spending an hour here and there.  At least a guide drones on with a canned background speech.  I suppose I was listening to that in Thai fairly often, but that part wasn't so memorable that it sticks out.

Of course what Thailand wants instead are 5 star guests, staying in $200 or higher per night resorts (which would be $500 in Hawaii instead), spending money in higher end restaurants, and buying local goods as souvenirs, or just as normal expense on clothing and such.  We never travel like that, as a family.  We stay in moderately priced hotels, and eat in lower cost local restaurants, in Thailand and elsewhere.  And we've travelled a lot.  We've been to where we did those tours on our own as well, in Japan and Korea, and also visited China, Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, Singapore, and Malaysia, multiple times each.  We've only been to Australia and Russia once, and make it back to the US from time to time.

One problem is that they probably can't really dictate who visits through marketing.  It would be nice if that was possible.  Then you could show those 5 star resorts and better restaurants in ads, and people on that page would stream into your country.  Or eco-tourism / home stays might thrive.  There's actually some chance of that, since it's a completely different theme, not just a different spending level, which is what they're trying to adjust.  Unsuccessfully; the tourism authority in Thailand has been discussing this for well over a decade, and the local consensus take is that they're not making any difference.

Tourism does thrive in Thailand.  Visitor numbers go up and down, for reasons they can't control, but it all works out.  

Legalized weed (marijuana) has been an interesting running theme, for a few years, which of course "they" (the Thai government) would see as a negative input, related to visitor type selection.  They don't want more hostel based backpackers.  Of course nothing is ever that simple, since different types of people might smoke weed, and more tourism is better, while less is worse. 

It's not as if it seems that 4 and 5 star resorts are going out of business, while hostel businesses are on the rise.  It's instead that tracking estimates of visitor spending, however accurate those may be, identify trends that are seen as unfavorable.  This is the same theme that's happening in Hawaii, so let's consider that part.

Related to Hawaii

Here's an example of the kind of article reference I had mentioned, which mixes in a lot of anecdotal accounts along with limited stats.  They can track average room rates, but visitor spending isn't something that would be well documented.  Maybe surveys help with that?

I really don't follow any related stats, so I've only seen different articles making the same kind of claims, based on similar spending estimates.  It's hard to imagine total visitor spending going down, given that room rates only go up.  The average cited is something like $400 per night (or a bit over that, which sounds kind of high, but who knows).  Resort fees, parking, and taxes keep going up, so the costs would rise, even beyond the room rate inputs increasing.

For what it's worth this is Google's AI take:

Hawaii tourism is experiencing a notable downturn, with visitor arrivals and spending dropping in early 2026. March 2026 saw a 1.7% decrease in visitors compared to 2025, influenced by severe weather, while 2025 saw sustained declines from 2024 levels. Key causes include high travel costs, a slowing U.S. market, lingering effects from the 2023 Maui wildfires, and reduced international travel.

From what I recall, beyond that article as a reference, tourist spending is either flat or else in decline.  It would make more sense to me if that was trying to capture spending beyond room costs, and maybe that is it.  From there I can only describe what I see "on the ground," since we actually live at the one edge of Waikiki.

The streets never seem empty.  You can't judge occupancy percentages that way though; if 10 to 20% less people visited we might not notice that in sidewalk traffic or beach space use.

What about visitor norms, guessing about spending levels?  The hearsay I would pass on might be of limited value, but I can still attempt that.  There are higher and lower spending level tourists, for sure, beyond almost everyone facing high room rates.  We live beside the local equivalent of a hostel, which is always full (seemingly); I guess that would be one way to drop costs.  Then again whenever we visit the Hilton Hawaiian Village, a sprawling, multi-building complex at the relative opposite extreme, it always seems to be quite full as well.  Their restaurants seem to be at capacity, and that closest beach space is packed.

One might imagine that they can see shifts in visitor origins or types (back to the problematic economic class distinctions), but it probably doesn't work out that way.  Or extrapolate from online discussion points, but again that's a mixed sample, and probably a poor reference.  

I see discussions about Hawaii and Waikiki tourism in Facebook and Reddit, and per the usual divide that breaks into two groups.  One segment isn't concerned about daily spending, which is going to be quite high, on guided tours, and going to typical Waikiki restaurants, or luaus.  The other perspective relates to complaints over a local burger costing at least $20 (which is does).  More like $30, with any drink, tax, and tip, and in a beachfront hotel restaurant that might be $60, or more, with alcoholic drinks.  It would seem strange spending $100 on a burger and a couple of drinks.  If spending a couple of extra thousand dollars on food is an issue then Hawaii isn't the place to go.

I've not seen mention of Hawaii using marketing changes to address this.  It probably wouldn't work if they tried, and it would awkward to market that higher end experiences are available, if your spending is unlimited.

We can see some broad changes in visitor origins, even guessed at from who is on the sidewalks.  Japanese tourists declined over the past 20 years, along with the decline in their economy (or even over the last 4 years).  This is where I'd add who seems to have replaced them, which groups, but I don't think that anyone's personal observations would be well-grounded or authoritative.  Even what I've just said might be questionable; maybe there are as many Japanese guests as ever.  I'm judging from people "looking Japanese."  

We sometimes take a free local shuttle, free if you have a JCB credit card, and of course almost everyone else on those are Japanese (JCB is the Japanese credit card version).  That kind of filtering makes the "general look" test unreliable, that where you happen to go changes everything.  

My own take

I don't think any tourist destinations can adjust who will visit.  Malaysia seemed to expand their tourism sector through extensive advertising, so I guess that could work (🎵 Malaysia, truly Asia🎵).

Beyond advertising there may be limited ways that these destinations could self-promote.  One example here in Waikiki has been a series of outdoor movies, shown on a main beach, for free (Sunset at the Beach).  This has been sponsored by Southwest Airlines, and I think not by local tourism agencies or government, but it's an example of something low-cost that could add appeal, especially with commercial partnership involved.  

Of course there is already plenty to do in Hawaii, lots of existing draw, but adding to that couldn't hurt.  Beyond there being more reason to visit it would seem more like visitors are appreciated, which is nice, and it can put a positive spin on local tourism support.  A collaborative arrangement for a fireworks display in Waikiki on Fridays is another example (that they're already doing); it just adds that little extra touch, to help make the thousands that tourists spent seem like a better value.

In Thailand all they would really need to do it promote local festivals that are already going on.  Those are typically framed as something locals mostly participate in, but foreigners are welcome at them, and there's nothing stopping them from framing them as a tourism draw.  

To me those are an exceptional and unique experience, and you can barely find out they're going on, on any sites or event calendars, so you really need to run across them by chance.  I suppose it's a concern that there is essentially no cost to attend those; people tend to buy food, but even those options are inexpensive, so it runs against the theme they are trying to promote, higher spending.

not exactly what I meant, but this light and sound show in Si Thep (historical area) was nice

still not what I meant, but the Bangkok Chinatown goes all-out for different themed festivals

I'd meant like a huge Red Cross event, but this small Squid Game themed festival works

this street art festival was nice, in an old part of Bangkok

that Red Cross event, which is massive, but that doesn't come across in this photo

Or I guess both places could promote marijuana tourism, since it's already happening, without them being involved?  I get it why both wouldn't want that to expand as a main part of the local image.  But they wouldn't have to spend a lot on ads referencing people getting high.  Holding a couple of related themed, medium scale events a year could explode awareness.  Local authorities wouldn't even need to hold those, they could just allow them, and businesses that are already related would take it from there.

But then both places need to sort out where it is that people are supposed to be getting high.  It's everywhere, in Honolulu, just walking down the street, but if people really are allowed to smoke on the beach or in parks they could mention that (or if they're not instead).  Or keeping it all in the grey area may make the most sense, what they already do.

In Thailand I think they have it narrowed down to people being allowed to smoke marijuana almost nowhere, only in shops that allow on-site consumption, which isn't how that usually goes (per online discussion; I've never been in such places there).  You can't smoke on the street, or generally even on an open hotel balcony.  Only partly a joke, old themes about illegal smoking are sometimes referenced online, about smoking and blowing it into a paper towel tube filled with fabric softener sheets.  Why make it both legal and also illegal?

  

In Hawaii the main problem seems to be out of control inflation, and I don't think that's under anyone's control.  They could address spiraling hotel costs by allowing Air BNB rentals (now disallowed in some zones), but with residential housing costs also spiraling that's very problematic.  Residential and retail rents seem to drive a lot of this cost increase, and there's no way to reverse that, or offset further increase.  Value will continue to be an issue, and hotels will need to trade off discounting to support high residency levels, as demand fluctuates.