u/Then_Sink4712

I recently went to a well-known shabu-shabu restaurant with my girlfriend. When we finished dinner, I asked the waitress serving our table to bring us the bill.

As she was walking back, her manager was standing behind her and started scolding her for not offering us dessert. I understand some Thai, so I could follow what was being said.

I told the manager that I liked the restaurant and had no issue with coming back, but I didn't think there was any need to scold the waitress so harshly, especially in front of us. The manager apologized and we left on good terms.

Afterwards, my Thai girlfriend told me that I probably shouldn't have said anything because it's considered socially acceptable for someone higher in the hierarchy to scold someone below them, even in front of other people.

I asked her how often she'd seen this happen, and she said quite often. I asked if she'd ever seen someone intervene, and she said no, because doing so could itself be considered rude.

I understand that the manager was probably trying to maintain the restaurant's standard of customer service. My issue wasn't really with her correcting the waitress, but with the way she did it, particularly in front of customers.

For Thai people here, is this genuinely considered culturally acceptable? Is publicly scolding someone who is lower in the hierarchy generally seen as normal, and would it actually be considered rude for someone else to intervene?

​

I’ve been in SaaS sales for 7 years and currently work in a team of 10 Account Executives. I’m consistently one of the top performers on the team, producing roughly 3x the revenue of my closest competitor.

About 90% of my deals are inbound, and I typically close 3–4 whale deals per month.

There’s one territory, however, where I’ve developed a very different approach: India.

After working across multiple territories for years, I’ve found this market relatively easy to generate demos from, but significantly harder to convert efficiently.

The pattern I’ve experienced is:

Very high initial interest and demo volume

Highly demanding prospects

Requirements changing repeatedly throughout the sales cycle

Limited transparency around the actual buying process and decision-makers

Significant price sensitivity, even after substantial discounts

Deals requiring a disproportionate amount of time relative to their expected value

In some cases, customers churning shortly after signing because they ultimately consider the pricing too high

For context, I’ve closed only 2 whale deals from India over the last 3 years.

One churned after 3 months despite receiving a 70% discount, with pricing ultimately being cited as the reason.

The second signed but didn't make payment for roughly 3 months.

I still close smaller deals from the territory, but when I look at the overall economics, I’m struggling to justify the investment.

At this point in my career, I can usually identify fairly early in a sales cycle when a deal is going to become a time sink. A deal can easily consume 2–10 hours once you factor in demos, additional meetings, calls, follow-ups, negotiations, internal coordination, etc.

Recently, I’ve started canceling or deprioritizing demos from this territory when the early qualification signals suggest the deal isn't worth pursuing.

It has made me much more transactional, and I know I’m probably leaving some revenue on the table. But I’m also protecting my time and focusing on opportunities where the probability of closing and retaining the customer is significantly higher.

I’m conflicted because I know this approach isn't necessarily optimal from a pure revenue-maximization perspective.

So I’m curious how other experienced SaaS sellers would handle this.

Would you:

Continue taking every inbound opportunity and qualify harder during the call?

Introduce stricter qualification criteria based on ACV, budget, authority, use case, etc.?

Apply different sales motions to this territory?

Accept that some territories simply have a worse effort-to-revenue ratio and prioritize accordingly?

Or am I simply falling into confirmation bias because I’ve seen the same patterns repeatedly?

I’m specifically interested in hearing from people who have managed large inbound funnels across multiple countries or territories.

How do you decide when a territory is genuinely inefficient versus when you’re just giving up too early?

​

I’ve been in SaaS sales for 7 years and currently work in a team of 10 Account Executives. I’m consistently one of the top performers on the team, producing roughly 3x the revenue of my closest competitor.

About 90% of my deals are inbound, and I typically close 3–4 whale deals per month.

There’s one territory, however, where I’ve developed a very different approach: India.

After working across multiple territories for years, I’ve found this market relatively easy to generate demos from, but significantly harder to convert efficiently.

The pattern I’ve experienced is:

Very high initial interest and demo volume

Highly demanding prospects

Requirements changing repeatedly throughout the sales cycle

Limited transparency around the actual buying process and decision-makers

Significant price sensitivity, even after substantial discounts

Deals requiring a disproportionate amount of time relative to their expected value

In some cases, customers churning shortly after signing because they ultimately consider the pricing too high

For context, I’ve closed only 2 whale deals from India over the last 3 years.

One churned after 3 months despite receiving a 70% discount, with pricing ultimately being cited as the reason.

The second signed but didn't make payment for roughly 3 months.

I still close smaller deals from the territory, but when I look at the overall economics, I’m struggling to justify the investment.

At this point in my career, I can usually identify fairly early in a sales cycle when a deal is going to become a time sink. A deal can easily consume 2–10 hours once you factor in demos, additional meetings, calls, follow-ups, negotiations, internal coordination, etc.

Recently, I’ve started canceling or deprioritizing demos from this territory when the early qualification signals suggest the deal isn't worth pursuing.

It has made me much more transactional, and I know I’m probably leaving some revenue on the table. But I’m also protecting my time and focusing on opportunities where the probability of closing and retaining the customer is significantly higher.

I’m conflicted because I know this approach isn't necessarily optimal from a pure revenue-maximization perspective.

So I’m curious how other experienced SaaS sellers would handle this.

Would you:

Continue taking every inbound opportunity and qualify harder during the call?

Introduce stricter qualification criteria based on ACV, budget, authority, use case, etc.?

Apply different sales motions to this territory?

Accept that some territories simply have a worse effort-to-revenue ratio and prioritize accordingly?

Or am I simply falling into confirmation bias because I’ve seen the same patterns repeatedly?

I’m specifically interested in hearing from people who have managed large inbound funnels across multiple countries or territories.

How do you decide when a territory is genuinely inefficient versus when you’re just giving up too early?

​

I’ve been in SaaS sales for 7 years and currently work in a team of 10 Account Executives. I’m consistently one of the top performers on the team, producing roughly 3x the revenue of my closest competitor.

About 90% of my deals are inbound, and I typically close 3–4 whale deals per month.

There’s one territory, however, where I’ve developed a very different approach: India.

After working across multiple territories for years, I’ve found this market relatively easy to generate demos from, but significantly harder to convert efficiently.

The pattern I’ve experienced is:

Very high initial interest and demo volume

Highly demanding prospects

Requirements changing repeatedly throughout the sales cycle

Limited transparency around the actual buying process and decision-makers

Significant price sensitivity, even after substantial discounts

Deals requiring a disproportionate amount of time relative to their expected value

In some cases, customers churning shortly after signing because they ultimately consider the pricing too high

For context, I’ve closed only 2 whale deals from India over the last 3 years.

One churned after 3 months despite receiving a 70% discount, with pricing ultimately being cited as the reason.

The second signed but didn't make payment for roughly 3 months.

I still close smaller deals from the territory, but when I look at the overall economics, I’m struggling to justify the investment.

At this point in my career, I can usually identify fairly early in a sales cycle when a deal is going to become a time sink. A deal can easily consume 2–10 hours once you factor in demos, additional meetings, calls, follow-ups, negotiations, internal coordination, etc.

Recently, I’ve started canceling or deprioritizing demos from this territory when the early qualification signals suggest the deal isn't worth pursuing.

It has made me much more transactional, and I know I’m probably leaving some revenue on the table. But I’m also protecting my time and focusing on opportunities where the probability of closing and retaining the customer is significantly higher.

I’m conflicted because I know this approach isn't necessarily optimal from a pure revenue-maximization perspective.

So I’m curious how other experienced SaaS sellers would handle this.

Would you:

Continue taking every inbound opportunity and qualify harder during the call?

Introduce stricter qualification criteria based on ACV, budget, authority, use case, etc.?

Apply different sales motions to this territory?

Accept that some territories simply have a worse effort-to-revenue ratio and prioritize accordingly?

Or am I simply falling into confirmation bias because I’ve seen the same patterns repeatedly?

I’m specifically interested in hearing from people who have managed large inbound funnels across multiple countries or territories.

How do you decide when a territory is genuinely inefficient versus when you’re just giving up too early?

Dating a Thai woman for 2 years, now discussing marriage and feeling increasingly uncomfortable with her family's expectations

I've been dating my Thai girlfriend for about 2 years, and we've recently started seriously discussing marriage.

Over the past few months, I've started receiving some requests/expectations that I'm finding difficult to deal with. The latest disagreement is about the wedding ring.

She wants a ring worth around 500,000 THB. I told her that I don't agree with spending that much on a natural diamond because, from my perspective, I could buy a lab-grown diamond for a fraction of the price that looks essentially identical and has the same practical purpose.

My position isn't that I can't afford the 500k ring. I can. My position is that I don't think it's worth 500k, so I don't want to spend 500k on it.

Her arguments are:

- A natural diamond has emotional significance to her.

- The ring is important for her family's "face" and how they are perceived.

- She believes that because of my lifestyle and financial situation, I should be able to afford it.

I told her that just because I can afford something doesn't mean I automatically want to spend money on it. I also don't like the idea that other people get to decide how I should spend my money simply because they know I can afford it.

For context, we've been together for 2 years and I generally pay for pretty much everything in the relationship. Looking back, I sometimes wonder if I've spoiled her and created some of these expectations myself.

My biggest concern isn't actually the ring.

I'm starting to wonder whether these expectations will continue after marriage. If I were not financially successful, would she still want to marry me? I believe the answer is yes, but her family seems to have quite a lot of expectations about things that, in my opinion, should ultimately be decisions between me and my future wife.

I've also been compared by her family to other people in their social circle who have spent similar amounts on weddings, rings, etc. I keep trying to explain that having the ability to pay for something doesn't mean I'm obligated to spend that amount.

They seem to interpret my refusal as me not being willing to "invest" in their daughter, which isn't what I'm saying at all. I'm willing to spend a lot on our wedding and our future together. I just don't want my spending to be dictated by what other people think I should be spending.

As an attempt to avoid future conflicts, I told my girlfriend that I'm willing to do the wedding and everything else, but I would want a prenup so that our financial expectations are clearly defined.

She initially disagreed, but eventually said she would accept a prenup, with one condition: her family shouldn't know about it.

That part also makes me uncomfortable. If we're going to have a prenup, why should it be something that needs to be hidden from her family?

At this point I'm genuinely stuck.

I don't know how much of this is normal Thai/Thai-Chinese family culture, how much is simply her family's personal expectations, and how much is a legitimate compatibility issue.

I also don't know whether I'm being unreasonable by refusing to spend 500k on a ring when I can afford it, or whether I'm right to draw a line here.

For people who have been in similar cross-cultural relationships, especially foreigners married to Thai women:

Is this primarily a cultural issue, or should I be looking at this as a fundamental disagreement about money, boundaries, and marriage?

And realistically, would you consider this a warning sign serious enough to reconsider the relationship?

I've submitted every document I could possibly provide, and then some.

The embassy came back asking for an invitation letter from an authorized Chinese tourism agency. The problem is, I'm traveling with a group of friends, so getting that kind of invitation simply isn't possible.

I replied to the embassy explaining exactly that. At the same time, I contacted several travel agencies to see if they could help. Every response was basically one of these:

- "We can't help."

- "You need to book the entire trip through us."

I don't understand why I should have to rebook my entire trip through an agency when I've already booked my own flights and hotels.

I also pointed out to the embassy that the TE invitation is listed as optional on their website, which makes this request even more confusing.

At this point, I'm honestly getting really frustrated with how this application is being handled.