Take your photography to the next level and beyond...

  • NEWS

Why not join for free today?

Join for Free

Your total photography experience starts here

PortraitPro 17 SITEWIDE 50% off sale + EXTRA 15% OFF code EPZR18

Businessman Paid ?50,000 For Photo Of A Beach Hut

Businessman Paid 50,000 For Photo Of A Beach Hut - A photo of a beach hut was sold for 50,000 when locals said the value of the real hut would only be 12k.

 Add Comment


An entrepreneur has paid £50,000 for a photo of a derelict beach hut in Thorpe Bay, Essex and residents say the hut itself could have been bought, at the time the shot was taken, for just £12,000.

According to the Daily Mail, Simon Lance Burgess paid the huge price for the shot, taken by professional photographer Andrew Areoff, to give him exclusive rights to the photograph. The Daily Mail say Simon said the photo would be used in an advertising campaign for his mortgage protection company.

The photographer, Andrew Areoff, took the photo of the beach hut, which has now been renovated, in 2006 for a project all about capturing the Essex coastline. (Via Mail Online)
Join ePHOTOzine and remove these ads.

Explore More


MrGoatsmilk 9 1.5k England
20 Apr 2012 11:34AM
Looks like a 50K well spent, they are both getting some very good free advertising all over the place which would have cost a hell of a lot more than paid for the photo. No doubt it will be all over the social networks soon again free of charge.

Well done to them for that idea Smile

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

monstersnowman 12 1.7k 1 England
20 Apr 2012 12:29PM
Being very generous spirited I am more than happy to sell photographs of my home for not a penny more than the house's market value - form an orderly queue please :o)
monstersnowman 12 1.7k 1 England
20 Apr 2012 12:33PM
He could have bought the hut then paid a photographer to take some mediocre shots and still been 30 odd grand in pocket - or better still commissioned somebody to photograph it for over 49 grand less than it cost him LOL. A fool and his money and all that ...
Gaucho 16 2.8k 2 United Kingdom
20 Apr 2012 4:38PM
Hmm. I think Stuart might be on to something there. We would certainly not have heard of either of them.
mad-dogs 15 2.2k England
20 Apr 2012 5:35PM
I wonder if he has a property release?
llareggub 7 825 United Kingdom
20 Apr 2012 6:38PM
The fiscal value of anything can only be measured in what folk are willing to pay for it and lets face it there aint nothin' stranger than folk!

It does not surprise me that someone is willing to pay silly money for something that I don't see the value of, what does surprise me is the fact that some people continue to be surprised Smile
User_Removed 14 17.9k 8 Norway
20 Apr 2012 7:12PM

monstersnowman 12 1.7k 1 England
20 Apr 2012 10:05PM
llareggub and Mike ... yes the value of something is set at what people are willing to pay but importantly what they 'need' to pay to secure the item they wish to purchase - if there is only a scarce supply then the value increases and if supply is plentiful then the price generally is less, as a buyers market forces sellers to compete for a sale and to do so they generally lower prices. But people are probably not as surprised by what the guy was willing to pay for the right image but about why he was willing to pay so much for a less than special or unique item or why the seller placed such a value AND got it (whichever way the price was arrived at). The fact that the photograph had no rarity, was not especially unique, exceptional in style or quality, was probably able to be produced at this quality or better by many photographers up and down the country and he could have found very similar images for MUCH less but despite all this he still felt the need to secure THIS image for sooooo much is what makes people seem surprised and question the price value. I can only think that he felt the image captured his message so perfectly and no other derelict or dilapidated huts looked as good (although this seems unlikely to me) and the specific hut in question had, by the time he saw the image, been renovated, so he couldnt commission another photographer to take the shot. OR maybe they are getting some great publicity. Also if this was a straight purchase, and not an auction I find it unbelievable that the photographer would have valued his image at 50,000 from the outset or that the purchaser would just offer this amount without starting at a more realistic value - seems a bit fishy to me ... hmmmm ...
ablast 9 10 Australia
21 Apr 2012 5:45PM
There may have been a bidding war that got out of hand. That is the only way I can see the photographer gaining such a sum for one photo.

Sign In

You must be a member to leave a comment.

ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.

Join For Free

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.