K-Why not OK. Why?

June 19, 2009 at 21:47 | In Gay Bangkok, M2M massage, Mack's advisories, Mack's reports | 3 Comments
Tags:

April 2009:

kwhy_front

There’s a reason why K-Why Massage along Rama 4 Road adopts a pricing system different from other massage places in Bangkok: so that they can exploit the guys working there. They require customers to pay 1,500 baht upfront before the session begins, saying it’s all-inclusive.  I believe most customers will assume that of the 1,500, the shop keeps 500 and the boy gets 1,000, on par with the minimum tip in many massage places in Bangkok.

But is that indeed the split at K-Why? That question nagged me.

So, in the privacy of room, I asked the boy serving me: “Of the 1,500 baht the boss takes, how much does he pay you?”

“Sewen,” he said.

“Seven hundred baht, boss give you?” I covered the ground again to be sure.

“Sewen me, eight bott.”

“The boss take eight hundred baht?”

“Krap.”

Well, well, well. Does it look just to you? It most surely does not to me. First of all, most other places, including far better appointed ones like Senso, Hero or Albury, charge less than 800 baht for a one-hour massage. Why should a dump like K-Why – OK, it’s been refurbished lately and is now a better grade of dump - expect more than 500 baht for the house? Secondly, the bosses at other places take the trouble to indicate to the client that the expected tip is a minimum of 1,000 baht. At K-Why, the boss quietly underpays (compared to the going rate) the boys instead of helping them maximise their earnings.

No doubt, one can always top up the tip directly to the masseur at K-Why, but that means the total pay-out by the client climbs above 1,500. In any case, most people would have assumed that the shop gives 1,000 out of the 1,500 to the boys and so might not think of topping it up.

I don’t think I am going to give this owner any further business. It feels wrong to help him with his selfish business model. I would encourage others to give K-Why a wide berth too.

On the other hand, one might say, avoiding the business only hurts the boys working there even more. A valid point, to be sure. In the end, I guess, it’s up to each reader to decide for himself how to respond to a situation like this.

What’s inside K-Why? Why do I say it is not worth 800 baht?

When you enter, you find yourself in a large room, maybe 8 x 6 metres, that used to be a gogo bar. It has a couple of sofas haphazardly laid out and it is where the boys line up for your selection. It’s really wasted space. Half that size would be enough for a line-up.

After you’ve made your selection, the mamasan leads you to the boss’ counter at the far end of the hall, where a fat grumpy slob in a dirty polo-shirt takes your money and makes change. With not a word of thanks.

The chosen boy then leads you up two floors.

On the second level, you notice, is more wasted space. There’s a large room with one piece of gym equipment. Further beyond there are two shower stalls, a dry sauna and three or four small massage rooms. Nobody is there on the entire floor unless they are inside one of the rooms.

On the third level is another empty hall, with three or four massage rooms leading from it. And one toilet/bathroom. Nobody is there either, save you and the masseur.

With so much space, the cost of decorating it becomes prohibitive – if at all there was ever any inspiration to do so. The result: bland, characterless rooms and hallways with second-hand furniture here and there.

Where does 800 baht out of your 1,500 baht go to? To rent. To the landlord, for all that unnecessary space. Not to the one who did the work, and to whom I think we owe a little loyalty.

3 Comments »

RSS feed for comments on this post.

  1. The way forward it to boycott the place, the business model fails & the staff go elsewhere. Good.

    On the other hand, if you patronise the place, others may start running a similar business model.

  2. In my case the friendliness of the cashier (boss) would be enough to put me off. I don’t agrees with the split of the fee either but I would think that the massage boys knew what the split would be before they started. They probably took the job because they needed it and the boss takes advantage of this. Its a shame actually.

    john

  3. It seems it’s really a question of which system of exploiting the “boys” is the most/least exploitive.

    Quite often though it’s a matter of the farang obsession with saving face … “the boy will think me foolish for tipping too much” or “the boss must think me a fool to think the boy will get B1000” or “a fat grumpy slob in a dirty polo-shirt takes your money and makes change. With not a word of thanks.,” etc.

    On the one hand there seemed to be general outrage that one gogo bar had the audacity to set a minimum tip, even though that clearly offered the boys some level of protection.

    “Four hundred baht for the bar,” he said. “And 1,500 baht for the boy.”With that second piece of information, I decided I wasn’t going to off any of them.”

    Apparently ensuring that the boys get B1500 is beyond the pale. The potential loss of farang face (and loss of control of the situation) trumps any joy that the boys are being protected or that the service may (or may not) be better than average.

    But now we are overwhelmed with concern because a boy is being guaranteed B700. “Well, well, well. Does it look just to you? It most surely does not to me.”

    Which approach is best for the boy? Which system maintains the delusion that Khun Farang is really the Big Boss?

    a) Pay the bar/massage venue a set amount and leave the tip to the warm, generous, caring farang;
    b) Pay the bar/massage venue a set amount and state a minimum tip for the boy;
    c) Pay the bar/massage venue a set amount, part of which is paid directly to the boy.

    The game of “I exploit,” “You exploit more,” ” He exploits the most,” is such fun. In Arabic it’s summed up by: “The camel cannot see the crookedness of its own neck”


Leave a comment

XHTML: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <pre> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Blog at WordPress.com. | Theme: Pool by Borja Fernandez.
Entries and comments feeds.