A Nice Hypothetical Problem to Have?

[popmuze]

Let's say two agents offered representation for your new novel. One of them gave you a whole set of notes for a revision. The other was willing to send it out as it. Which would you go with?

[ChaosTitan]

I would go with the agent who had the sales record in my genre, who I felt was most excited for the project, and who brought the most relevant experience to the table. Also, I'd try to gauge the revisions and if I agreed they'd make the book stronger or not--if I didn't agree with the revisions, I wouldn't sign with the agent.

[AlishaS]

I have to agree with ChaosTitan, I would not solely look at the fact that one gave your revisions and one didn't. If the revisions help the book become better than great. I would choose the one who yes as mentioned above was more excited about your project, who had the better sales and so forth.

The revisons is just a small nudge in either direction and you should look at the whole picture. You have the time to think about the decision so do your research on who what do your book better justice.

[RJK]

Send the other agent my way.

[Albannach]

Definitely the one who showed the most enthusiasm for my work. I assume I wouldn't have submitted to an agent who didn't handle my genre. But with this market, the agent better really like what he or she is pitching.

Edit: The one asking for the revisions MIGHT be the one with the most enthusiasm since they would have put thought into it. Or the one not asking for them might LOVE it and the other only so so. You'd have to talk to them to know.

[Cliff Face]

Yeah, check with the proposed revisions to see if they're apt. Then find out the sales figures for each agent. Then decide.

Then have tequila, because who doesn't love tequila?

[Me&BacchusGoIntoABar]

Judging how enthusiastic and excited the agent is for your work is tricky, though. Some people are really good at selling that sort of thing, so you also need a b.s. detector because you know they're trying to butter you up--and who doesn't want to hear about how great their novel is. Then again, if they convince you that they love your work, they're more likely to be able to sell acquiring editors on how great you are also.

Maybe a good way to do that is to ask them what they liked about your book and see how many substantive, specific points they make versus how many generic "you are awesome" comments they make.

[Me&BacchusGoIntoABar]

Yeah, check with the proposed revisions to see if they're apt. Then find out the sales figures for each agent.

How easy is that to do?

[Cliff Face]

Ah, well, I have no experience with finding out sales figures - I was just echoing someone's earlier point. I guess seeing whether they represented a bestseller in your genre could achieve enough...

[Wordwrestler]

If the revisions are right on, if you feel they'll make your book better, then go with that agent. Editors are much more willing to buy a project that's nice and shiny.

To me, this is the big question:
Do you need to do those revisions?
Do they strike you as mostly insightful or way off base?

Although I'm sure you thought your book was as good as you could get it before you sent it to agents, if the agent's notes bring valid issues to your attention and you think that most of the changes would help your book, then you've got to revise, and I would choose the agent who's shown a willingness to be a part of that process.

If you disagree with the majority of the suggested revisions, then you probably don't see eye to eye with the agent who requested them on what's the right direction for your book, and the other agent would be a better fit.

If some of the significant changes seem helpful, while others you object to, you might engage the agent in a discussion by phone or e-mail (I did this by e-mail, since it was easier for me to articulate my thoughts and to know that I was saying everything I needed to say that way), in which you offer different solutions to the problems in your book. This is a great opportunity to see what it will be like to work with that agent.

[JoNightshade]

Maybe a good way to do that is to ask them what they liked about your book and see how many substantive, specific points they make versus how many generic "you are awesome" comments they make.

This. If I had to decide between agents, my decision would rest on how much I felt the agent "got" what I was trying to do with my work.

I actually did have an agent who "really wanted to work with me" and then asked for a list of revisions... the sum of the revisions was essentially taking my book in the opposite direction from what I wanted it to be. Her notes made me realize that I was straddling a line; she wanted me to go one way, I really preferred the other. So it did help in the sense that it clarified what I needed to change to make it a better book - but it wasn't the changes she wanted.

[kaitie]

I don't remember who said this, but I remember reading not long ago an agent discussing this issue from the agent perspective. The agent stated that the writer almost always goes with the one that's willing to take them on as is rather than do the revisions, but that this particular agent always hated to see it because often the revisions would have made the work better and easier to sell (which they occasionally don't). The advice given was that in cases like this it's best to take the revisions.

I'm not sure that I'd agree that this is always the best option, but I think a good point is brought up--don't just take the easy way out. It's easy to see one person who loves our work as is and another who doesn't and go with the one who loves it. I think it's easy to be excited and rush. I also think it's incredibly important to first look at those revisions mentioned and consider whether or not there might be something to them.

I also think it depends on how each agent would fit with me in terms of style, personality, and how much they like the work.

[popmuze]

From what are hear, there are two schools of agents, the ones who routinely send books out almost as is and the others who put them through another rewrite. As far as choosing agents, it's so nearly impossible to get one these days, that if you had two wanting to represent you, I'm sure they'd both have to love the book (even the one who saw enough in it to want to make it even better). As far as previous sales history or best-sellers, I've found most of the big agents aren't looking to add to their lists. All the ones on my list have lots of sales, but no writers I've ever heard of. It makes me realize how many writers are out there (who I've never heard of). So it's a tossup on all counts.
Not that I have this problem yet. But I hope I do one day.

[Maxinquaye]

I had a talk about that over a nice chianti (no liver or fava beans involved!) with a mate, and we talked about what to do if we got accepted by agents, and what we would do if we got a huge advance. There was a auction of some kind, and the advance climbed to like 4-500k. Would we take it?

Money is always nice, i guess, but I think taking an advance like that would ruin your writing career, if it's a debut novel. You wouldn't be able to sell your next book.

So, to bring it back to the dilemma in this, I *think* I would go with the agent offering edits. Of course, I can't say for sure unless I get into that position.

[Fredster]

I'm thinking I would go with the one I thought could get me the best publishing deal, preferably a bidding war by multiple publishers.


(since we're speaking in hypotheticals :) )

[Jamesaritchie]

I think it depends as much on the type of writer you are as on the agent. I'm willing to listen to suggestions from an agent, but teh decision on whether to take those siggestions is always mine, and the last thing I want is an agent who thinks he knows more about writing than I do.

If I say no to suggested revisions, I want an agent who will still send out the book.

[popmuze]

This is always my dilemma. If you find an agent willing to send out your book, it doesn't mean the next twenty five agents won't find something lacking. Then again, once your book is picked up by a publisher, your editor may have lots of revisions too. And then, once it's published, reviewers will also have their opinions. Obviously, the best part of writing is writing. After that it's one nightmare after another.

[Lady Ice]

Let's say two agents offered representation for your new novel. One of them gave you a whole set of notes for a revision. The other was willing to send it out as it. Which would you go with?

I'd go with the first one, unless the revisions were stupid. It seems unlikely that the agent would want no changes whatsoever and at least the first has looked over it closely.

[Maxinquaye]

I'm thinking I would go with the one I thought could get me the best publishing deal, preferably a bidding war by multiple publishers.


(since we're speaking in hypotheticals :) )

I think you actually have to be a bit careful. At the point of signing, you're having an adversarial relationship with the agent. It's a point of business, and you need to keep your business sense going.

After the signing, the agent becomes your champion, but before that you can't help the fact that the agent is looking for the best deal for him/her. A big fat advance means a big fat cut for the agent.

But it may also mean a big fat advance that kills your writing career. Instead of getting say £30k per book for your next 10 books, you end up getting £100k per book for the only one that will be published by you.

[Fredster]

Instead of getting say £30k per book for your next 10 books, you end up getting £100k per book for the only one that will be published by you.
I think this would only apply to average writers. I'm convinced my 250,000 word teen vampire erotica fiction novel will be a bestseller, especially among older people.

[Maxinquaye]

I think this would only apply to average writers. I'm convinced my 250,000 word teen vampire erotica fiction novel will be a bestseller, especially among older people.

Nah, my 400.000 word zombie dark romance will take whatever space there was. Sorry.

[ORION]

you guys are forgetting about my cat Tooloose's 350 word (so far) Alien Space Monkey Trilogy that has horse vampires and dog zombies in it...

[IceCreamEmpress]

I'd go with the one who has gotten the best deals (per the Publishers Weekly announcements) for books that are similar to mine in genre, subgenre, intended audience, and feel.

[Bookewyrme]

But it may also mean a big fat advance that kills your writing career. Instead of getting say £30k per book for your next 10 books, you end up getting £100k per book for the only one that will be published by you.

I keep seeing allusions to this, but I am confused. Why does a large advance kill your career?

[Maxinquaye]

I keep seeing allusions to this, but I am confused. Why does a large advance kill your career?

As a debutant you're not likely to sell enough books for the book to earn-out the advance, which means when your next book arrives on that publisher's desks they're going to look at your sales figures and shudder.

[djf881]

I think you actually have to be a bit careful. At the point of signing, you're having an adversarial relationship with the agent. It's a point of business, and you need to keep your business sense going.

After the signing, the agent becomes your champion, but before that you can't help the fact that the agent is looking for the best deal for him/her. A big fat advance means a big fat cut for the agent.

But it may also mean a big fat advance that kills your writing career. Instead of getting say £30k per book for your next 10 books, you end up getting £100k per book for the only one that will be published by you.


Probably not true. As I understand it, the publisher's willingness to pay the author is based on their P&L calculation. If they pay the author a substantially lower advance than they are willing to pay, they are lowballing the deal and the agent has not been an effective advocate for the author, unless the agent has won some other important concession (higher royalty percentage or escalators) in exchange for the lower advance.

A better book deal means that you get a bigger print run, which means that the book will be supported by more marketing resources, it will be sold harder to accounts by sales, and it might get important stuff like co-op bookstore placement.

If the book doesn't sell, you'll have trouble selling the next one whether you got paid well for the first or not.

[Bookewyrme]

See, that's what I'd always sort of envisioned in my uneducated way. But here everyone seems to imply that if you take a big advance, even if your book does well, your career is automatically dead, and that confused me.

[djf881]

See, that's what I'd always sort of envisioned in my uneducated way. But here everyone seems to imply that if you take a big advance, even if your book does well, your career is automatically dead, and that confused me.

This is something people say when they receive or anticipate small advances.

P&L takes your previous sales into account, but not your previous advance. There are authors who got big advances and then got dismal sales, and never published anything again. There are also authors who got small advances and then got dismal sales and never published anything again.

Getting a big advance doesn't make your sales worse, so why would it harm your career?

[IceCreamEmpress]

As a debutant you're not likely to sell enough books for the book to earn-out the advance, which means when your next book arrives on that publisher's desks they're going to look at your sales figures and shudder.

A good agent--one who wants to work with you over a career, not pump-and-dump you like a penny stock--will have a sense of what kind of advances are appropriately generous and what kind of advances are setting up unmeetable expectations.