In article , David G. Bell
writes
I've an idea of how much money a photographer can have tied up in
hardware.
Can vary enormously, the difference between David Bailey or Lord
Lichfield and myself would be quite large.


It's a couple of orders of magnitude less than the equivalent for
farming,
Again that could vary, Bailey probably has far more tied up in his
business than you. But if you want to use myself as an example then yes,
you are correct.

and quality camera gear seems to hold its value rather better
than farm machinery.
Not true, second-hand photographic equipment is in abundance. Prices are
very cheap. Now digital photography is taking over older film
cameras/darkroom/processing equipment is not sought after and you can
pick up some good deals.

I have a film processor I paid about 5 grand for a few years ago, I
could hardly give it away now.

Digital equipment will hold its value relatively well in the short term
but rapid developments in technology make it quickly outdated and
virtually worthless in the same way as computers and printers.

Come to think of it I have a lot tied up in computers/printers/software
which I am going to see virtually no return on when I come to sell it.
Most of it will end up in a skip, I already have piles of it in the
loft. You can see why Gordon and Tony give me 100 per cent tax relief on
it!

I realise given the state on agriculture that there is probably an
abundance of machinery out there at bargain prices but when you are in
an industry that has become computer technology based you have similar
problems.


For that reason, I suspect it was easier for you to change direction.
Less of your wealth was tied up in a specific business.
Yes, I take your point now you have got to it

It is not impossible to get out of agriculture if you are unhappy with
it though is it?

You must forgive me my intolerance of whiners and moaners of their lot.
In some cases it is genuinely out of their hands but usually it is not.

Be positive !

Cheers
Dave

--