Agency reading fees (good or bad?)

I'll review my documentation tonight. I believe the original recommendation was based on a letter from them.

I have to say, it's quite fascinating to see how often the "why doesn't someone just work for a commission" line of thought comes up. How many of those making this suggestion are, in fact, working 100% on commission? In my experience, very few people actually do. Most have some kind of base salary. But not agents. They do it all on commission. Perhaps editors should also work on commission? No more salaries. Come to work, work for free. Find a good book and you get a royalty on every copy sold. Would that work?


I can't afford a Mercedes, so I don't drive one. If you are a writer, but can't afford the expenses involved (paper, toner, manuscript boxes, and, perhaps, the reading fees required to get your work professionally considered), then don't be a writer. Or kill the cable TV and use that to pay for it.


Very, very few businesses that I know of do something for nothing. A real-estate broker may come look at my house and tell me what she thinks of it for no charge. But how many houses are coming up for sale in any given day? The volume just isn't there. If it were, I promise you, there would be a consultation fee.


And that's a huge part of the problem. There's too much volume. I have said that if authors were required to type their books on manual typewriters, there would be far fewer folks trying to write books. I've closed to new queries and submissions for December and January. Maybe I will for February, too. In fact, I will until I'm caught up. I have a box of fifty sample chapters and proposals waiting for me in San Diego, to read between Xmas and New Year's. I have at least that many, plus too many full manuscripts, here. Could I get an intern? Sure, but the problem with interns is that they aren't discriminating enough. They like too much! Besides, didn't someone above express the concern that interns would be reading their stuff if they paid a reading fee? So, it's okay if an intern reads it for nothing, but not if a fee was paid? Well, I guess you get what you pay for.


Well, not really, eh? In publishing, authors seem to expect feedback and get quite unhappy if they get "form rejects" from agents to whom they have paid nothing for an opinion.


What if an agency charging a reading fee guaranteed that you would at least be informed why your book was being passed on? Would that be worth it? To get that feedback? How much would that be worth? Book doctors I know charge $125/hour. I can read 75-100 manuscript pages per hour. So that 400 page manuscript would cost at least $500 for a read. Is that worth it?


This is an economic study, folks. I'm trying to figure out if there's any businesspeople out there who recognize that the amount of work agents perform FOR FREE and also recognize that maybe that needs to change. It's like the realization that taxes aren't high enough. Every once in a while, you look around at the homeless and the roads and the crime and you think, Maybe if taxes were a bit higher, we could fix some of these things.


Maybe, if there were reading fees allowed, the turnaround time on submissions wouldn't be months or years. Maybe there wouldn't be just form rejects.


Would some regulation help? If the AAR said, "Reading fees are okay, provided you meet the following criteria....," would authors accept that? If the State passed a law requiring literary agents to be regulated in some fashion, use a standard agreement of the sort Real Estate agents, must, would reading fees be acceptable?


Our business is broken, folks. How could it be fixed? And, please, don't expect anyone to do more than they do "on commission" or for free.


Devilishly yours,
Andy

I can't agree that an upfront fee is appropriate, for two reasons.

(1) An upfront fee without a reasonable probability of a payoff is, statistically, lost money. Those agents who do have a reasonably high probability of a "payoff" (getting representation) seldom can take the next step (turn that into a publishing contract). If good, honest, appropriate agents typically took on even 2% of the queries they got, and the reading fee was minimal ($10-$20), this particular aspect of the argument would be completely different.

(2) There are honest used car dealers out there. There are even honest used cars. However,

• Some of the dealers who are honest are only honest because it's cheaper than defending against lawsuits,
• Some of the dealers who are honest are only honest as a sales tool compared to the competition, and
• The median used-car buyer still can't spot the lemon on the lot without expert assistance.

Bluntly, there are virtually no reputable, widely available, easy-to-find resources that cover the literary business; at best, it's "choose two of these three," and more often "choose one of these three". This is a consumer protection issue; if the publishing industry didn't work so hard (and successfully) to keep its mechanisms a mystery, I'd be a little less skeptical—but only a little.

In short, my disdain for reading fees is not to "protect" readers from Andy Zack. It's to protect them from Dorothy Deering, and George Titsworth, and Martha Ivery. If that sounds too paternal, we'll just have to agree to disagree.

I’ll more than agree that the system is broken. How to fix it--hmm, well, publishers have fixed it their own way, many do not take un-agented submissions. They stopped the flood that way, though I know they still get flooded with people who think the rule doesn’t apply to them.

So agents are left with the sorting process. And what a mess if the submissions sent to a very small e-zine are any indication. Just read some of the " writing a skill/talent etc." threads, anyone who can bang out stuff on a keyboard thinks they are writers (doesn’t matter if they can tell a good story or not) and they send their stuff to any publisher or agent that they can, fully expecting to be picked up and be a millionaire the next day. UGH!

I’ve said it before and been bashed for telling people that they are nuts to expect a personal response form an agent or an editor even if it was a requested submission--has nothing to do with being polite--in fact it seems rather rude of an author to think they have that right. An agent doesn’t work for you, you make a partnership and work together to make money for both of you, and that agent certainly doesn’t owe you something for nothing because you allowed them to read your work and glory.

You want to be a writer, try it the old way, no spell check, no grammar check--an old manual type writer ( I started on an old green Royal) that you have to put in and roll each sheet of paper--come on do it on a manual (no electric anything)--don’t know how to spell a word, grab that huge unabridged dictionary and look that word up. Spend hours (days, and weeks) going over your hand written drafts to correct every error you can before you type it in because the spirits be darned if you screw up you have to at the least retype that page, at the worst retype the entire book from that point on. Pay to have it sent and then returned if rejected because you hope you can salvage it to send on to the next publisher or agent. Wait on the mail, no e-mail---

If you are willing to do that then you should submit, but don’t expect something for nothing. Why should an agent absorb the cost of postage for you as well--I hear that one a lot, too.

But how do we fix a broken system--well, maybe writers need to realize that nothing in this world is free. And maybe the reading fees etc. need some sort of regulation to govern them--do I see this happening--not hardly.

Well, I am off to do my thing and get a few K words written today and check e-mail.

Shawn

I have to say, it's quite fascinating to see how often the "why doesn't someone just work for a commission" line of thought comes up. How many of those making this suggestion are, in fact, working 100% on commission?

Click to expand...

If I work for a business, I draw a salary, and the money that pays that salary comes from my business' sales. Assuming an agent as a business, which should be the case even if they're working out of their spare room, the same applies - with the additional problem that these are the ones who are in much less of a position to hire external help, and much likelier to benefit from the extra cash infusions. I don't actually know how it works at the dedicated agenting firms, but don't they get paid a salary instead of personally and individually relying on the luck of the draw each month?

(Not to mention that the authors themselves are also working 100% on commission, assuming accurate advances. Maybe this should just be flung on its head entirely - the publishers paying big agents to act as talent scouts, submitting the best material they receive and getting direct kickbacks for providing material the company wants, rather than having to chase editors and sell books*)

(* Yes, I know agents do more than that, but we're in the realms of debate here ;-))

What if an agency charging a reading fee guaranteed that you would at least be informed why your book was being passed on?

Click to expand...

"Our client list is full. That'll be $100, please."

That's a pretty damn slippery slope to start walking down - the kind of environment that just breeds scammers. It's bad enough trying to spot them now, using the 'money flows towards the author' rule. I mean, Andy talks about the information on his site, but that's fairly atypical from what I've seen. If it's confusing now, imagine what it would be like when an agent has a vested interest in keeping things vague and confusing. Certainly in the UK, most of the agencies you find in the W&AY don't even have websites.

Moreover, how would you judge agencies on a P&E style basis? Wouldn't the smaller guys get beaten down simply for not being able to take as many clients, effectively giving the larger organisations complete control over the market and utterly suffocating the individuals and smaller companies that could best benefit from the cash?

Richard said:

Moreover, how would you judge agencies on a P&E style basis? Wouldn't the smaller guys get beaten down simply for not being able to take as many clients, effectively giving the larger organisations complete control over the market and utterly suffocating the individuals and smaller companies that could best benefit from the cash?

Click to expand...

P&E does not rate or recommend against agencies for being small or having fewer clients than others. They're judged on results and how they treat their clients along with what policies and procedures they practice.

if the publishing industry didn't work so hard (and successfully) to keep its mechanisms a mystery, I'd be a little less skeptical—but only a little.

Click to expand...

What's the big secret? Honestly, I don't think the publishing industry tries to keep anything a secret. What do you want to know? After all, that's why I'm here, to answer your questions.

There are many good thoughts here, but some are not. For example, this business about real-estate agents doesn't quite compute. A real-estate agent spends only a few minutes in your home before deciding whether or not he or she can sell it. An agent might have to spend several hours reading your manuscript. The real-estate agent doesn't rebuild and paint your house before selling it. The agent may, in fact, edit or line-edit the proposal or manuscript before trying to sell it.

Car salesmen are working with potentially paying customers. Authors are not paying customers. Publishers are. I will spend my lunch hour with an editor, who will not only buy lunch but perhaps buy the rights to publish a book I represent. Believe me, if authors were paying agents for their time, agents would be more than willing to chat. But they aren't.

I know nothing about academic admissions fees, but do wonder if this is true of all universities or only state universities and colleges. Is Harvard turning over the admissions fees to the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, or just pocketing them? If they are just pocketing them, then my comparison is valid.

It sounds like the agents who read the partials gave you feedback. Congrats. You got something for nothing. In fact, I've heard many a story of agents who gave feedback on more than one draft of a novel, only to have the author use that feedback to revise and sign with another agent who sold the book. Who was the sucker there?

"Our client list is full. That'll be $100, please."

Click to expand...

That's just ridiculous. The agent would be completely open to action if that were the case. No reasonable businessperson would even think of trying that.

I raised the question of paying for representation on an hourly or monthly basis but don't recall a lot of responses. I have a client who paid $5,000 per month for three months for a book publicist to try and get him hits. There was no guarantee of any publicity, radio appearances, or print mentions. But for $5,000 per month, she was supposed to be working on getting him press. I don't see writers' groups up in arms over such publicists. Why not? And if that model is acceptable, why shouldn't it work for literary agents? Any agent can do the math: Work for $5,000/month for X number of clients, versus hoping for 15% commission if this book turns out to be the next DA VINCI CODE or HARRY POTTER. Even an insane gambler would likely recognize the money upfront is the better bet.

If I work for a business, I draw a salary, and the money that pays that salary comes from my business' sales. Assuming an agent as a business, which should be the case even if they're working out of their spare room, the same applies - with the additional problem that these are the ones who are in much less of a position to hire external help, and much likelier to benefit from the extra cash infusions. I don't actually know how it works at the dedicated agenting firms, but don't they get paid a salary instead of personally and individually relying on the luck of the draw each month?

Click to expand...

Depends on the agency. When I started working at SCG, for example, I got a draw against 50% of commission. So, basically I got a check for $500 per week. If I sold a book for $10,000, the agency would keep 50% of the commission off the top. The other 50% was due me, but since I was getting a draw, that 50% went to earn down the already-received draw. The 50/50 split is not unusual. I believe that William Morris and ICM work on a salary plus bonus basis. Some agencies may work on a graduated scale, i.e., if you earn out your draw for the year in the first six months, your commission share for the rest of the year is higher. Unfortunately, one thing that is not a guarantee in publishing is that next year will be better than the last.

Best,
Andy

DaveKuzminski said:

P&E does not rate or recommend against agencies for being small or having fewer clients than others. They're judged on results and how they treat their clients along with what policies and procedures they practice.

Click to expand...

I know you don't, hence P&E 'style'. What I mean is that if everyone's charging a fee, the ground's quickly going to get muddier when finding out who's legitimate - for instance, how to go about rating an agent who has two clients for form's sake, but in practice earns thousands and thousands a month simply by not telling people that they're not taking on anyone new and letting the cheques flood in. It's not that big a jump between the 'We're full, sorry' letter that Andy objected to above and 'Does not suit our needs at this time'.

It would make it one hell of a lot harder to find a legitimate agent amidst all the scammers, and given that people will only be able to afford so many shots at it, push them towards the larger organisations with more chance of having an open space in the agenting lottery than smaller ones who could quite well be better suited to their needs.

Andrew Zack said:

That's just ridiculous. The agent would be completely open to action if that were the case. No reasonable businessperson would even think of trying that.

Click to expand...

Really? Just as writing competitions return your cheque if they like your story enough that they've have used it, but have a full anthology on their hands? Going pay-to-play opens you up to a whole storm of potential problems anyway, from writers furious that their book report wasn't up to scratch for the amount they paid, to questions of what to do when you can't take the book on for reasons that have nothing to do with the reading fee - say, you already have a fantasy humourist you're devoting all your attention at places like Tor or wherever on. At least with no-fee-no-foul, the worst they can do is ***** that you sent a form rejection.

Ultimately, if it's not fair to take the cheque in the 'We're full' instance, there are going to be a huge number of other times where it's not fair to take the cheque either, and just as many with huge scope for abuse. Especially with the cash-strapped agents most in need of the money, and the fact that these are presumably going to be the books that you spend the majority of your valuable time on before determining that they're not for you.

Basically, I really can't see how agencies forced to read and write-up some 400 pages of some kid's illiterate Harry Potter clone that will never see ink because it'll net them a couple of hundred quid is much of an improvement, in either time or direction of effort for clients, over just being able to dump it back in the SAE with a form letter.

I raised the question of paying for representation on an hourly or monthly basis but don't recall a lot of responses. I have a client who paid $5,000 per month for three months for a book publicist to try and get him hits. There was no guarantee of any publicity, radio appearances, or print mentions. But for $5,000 per month, she was supposed to be working on getting him press. I don't see writers' groups up in arms over such publicists. Why not?

Click to expand...

Because the industry hasn't effectively made such publicists mandatory?

Really? Just as writing competitions return your cheque if they like your story enough that they've have used it, but have a full anthology on their hands?

Click to expand...

I'm not sure I understand what you're saying there. Do they return the check? I don't involve myself with such competitions, so I can't comment. If they don't, then essentially they are charging a reading fee. What do you get for that fee? Just read? Hmm. Then when will I be seeing these "competitions" blackballed on P&E?

Because the industry hasn't effectively made such publicists mandatory?

Click to expand...

Really? I'd say they have. Several of my nonfiction clients and some of my fiction clients have hired them, because they believe that publishers will do nothing to promote their books. And they aren't far off the mark. I have a book called THE DEAD OF WINTER, by Bill Warnock, a nonfiction account of the recovery of several soldiers' remains from the Battle of the Bulge. Dramatic and interesting. Emotionally wrenching. As far as I can tell, the publisher, an imprint of Penguin Group USA, did not get one review in PUBLISHERS WEEKLY, LIBRARY JOURNAL, BOOKLIST, KIRKUS or any other trade publication. There has also not been on radio hit, one tv hit, and the only hits that have happened came from leads the author developed.

Publicists not mandatory? Hmmm.

The truth is, I tend to discourage my clients from hiring them, because I haven't seen a lot of results. You have to sell a hell of a lot of $25.00 books to earn back $5,000 at 10% of retail royalties. I don't think any of my clients has been convinced it was worth it.

Andy

Really? I'd say they have.

Click to expand...

The truth is, I tend to discourage my clients from hiring them, because I haven't seen a lot of results. You have to sell a hell of a lot of $25.00 books to earn back $5,000 at 10% of retail royalties. I don't think any of my clients has been convinced it was worth it.

Click to expand...

Er...that doesn't sound particularly mandatory to me. While I'm pretty sure you're not going to get your book read by most of the bigger publishers these days unless it came through an agent.

I wanted to add something to this thread, but it's all already been said, I think.

I understand the agent's POV - their time is valuable. On the other hand (I have more fingers) if the agent finds that 'pot of gold' book that makes his or her year, then it's worth it, right? What if that author never submitted to the agent, because he couldn't afford to pay a reading fee? Rare, I know, I know - 99% of subs aren't publishable, some aren't even readable. But, does it really average out? Then you're just going to be deluged with subs that are bad, sent by people who either a) have the money or b) put themselves in debt to do it.

Don't think a reading fee with get rid of that bad slush - I think PA has proven that even people who write badly will do anything to chase a dream. (and I'm not trying to be mean here, you all know what I mean) BUT it may keep an author with actual good, marketable work off your desk.

Andrew Zack said:

I'm not sure I understand what you're saying there. Do they return the check?

Click to expand...

Nope. But they'd cash it, no matter how ridiculous other businessmen might find it.

I don't involve myself with such competitions, so I can't comment. If they don't, then essentially they are charging a reading fee. What do you get for that fee? Just read? Hmm. Then when will I be seeing these "competitions" blackballed on P&E?

Click to expand...

Right now.

Additionally, it really doesn't make sense to enter a contest that charges a fee if there isn't any prize worth significantly more than the entry fee. We strongly advise writers to enter only those contests without a fee. P&E does not recommend any contests with entry fees.

Click to expand...

And again at the end of the listing:

P&E does not recommend any contests with entry fees.

Click to expand...

You'll also see plenty of 'Charges fee, not recommended' stickers, within that guideline.

Actually, I agree with what you said. You pay an agency $70, $400, they're going to give you a more positive report no matter what - even if the manuscript is drivel. You see that all the time with screenplay services. You also see a lot of cut n' paste with those paid-for readers' reports. "A great character arc." "The second act needs more work though." Blah blah blah. You're better off spending that money on a writing class.

If the problem here is the size of an agent's slush pile, there's a lot of ways to reduce it without reading fees. Don't take unsolicited manuscripts or only take them at selected times of the year. Work by referral only. Shut down the website. Skim, skim, skim. And don't bother with the lengthy rejection letters. When most of us want feedback, we know where to get it.

On the other hand, if the concern is the need to keep independent, non-big-agency agents economically viable, well, what can I tell you? Move to Montreal? It's a beautiful city and I'm sure the Canadian government has a program just for you.

Andrew Zack said:

Car salesmen are working with potentially paying customers. Authors are not paying customers. Publishers are. I will spend my lunch hour with an editor, who will not only buy lunch but perhaps buy the rights to publish a book I represent. Believe me, if authors were paying agents for their time, agents would be more than willing to chat. But they aren't.

Click to expand...

The author is your PRODUCT, Andrew. What do you sell to the publisher you're happily having lunch with? The author's work.

So, you have to get out there and get your product. I guess you're looking for us authors to pay a marketing fee to you to sell our book to the publisher. Oh, wait. Authors DO pay a marketing fee. They pay their salesman (their agent) a 15% commission for the marketing work they do in selling their work to the publishers.

Sometimes you have to do a little work on spec. Hey, that's what authors have to do a LOT of, too.

You're still making money if you chose to represent an author and you sell their ms. The product.

Here's one thing I also find interesting - I know of a very highly placed publishing executive who said to a roomful of authors who wrote for his house words to the effect that writers should no longer expect to actually make a living as an author. Writing is a hobby, a passion, something we should do because we love it.

Well, how come everyone ELSE in the publishing industry, from that publishing executive, to the editors, to agents, all expect to make a LIVING from the product which wouldn't even exist without the author?

I know that editors are not well paid. I understand that. But does the publishing house say to them, look, I know you LOVE books, and they're your passion. Great. Just don't expect to make a living as an editor. You're going to have to go out and get another job to support your habit, your passion, for editing.

Now Andrew, you present another way for the agents to make a living - by getting paid to read submissions while they're looking for their next great product. So, how do we fix the system so it makes it more likely that the person who creates this product, the author, can also make a living?

You wanted someone to look at reading fees from a businessman's POV? Ok.

Let's say I run a giftshop. And I'm looking through catalogs, looking for items to stock my giftshop, because after all, I need PRODUCT. Gotta have something to sell, or else the whole thing fails. Should the wholesalers who create the product pay me for the time it takes me to sift through the catalogs to find the right items that my customers will want to buy? Even if that takes me several hours?

I don't think so. That's part of doing business. I'm not in favor of agents making authors pay for office expenses, either. Hey, nobody pays for my office expenses but me. Again, it's part of doing business.

Susan G.

Susan, great post. I've been reading this thread, swinging from hope to discouragement. I can see where it's frustrating for agents and publishers alike, but some of the posts here have seemed punative to the one group that always starts by working their a$$es off for free.

Jon: I've tried to address all of the points along the way. If I missed one of yours, I'm not sure where that was.


Susan: Wow. Got up on the wrong side of the bed? Seriously, I playing Devil's Advocate and you're attacking me like I posted I'm suddenly charging $500 to submit to me. Which I'm not.

Your argument regarding the gift shop is one of the more compelling I've seen. But I'm not sure I find it 100% convincing. For starters, if catalogues full of junk show up, you throw them away, but the company that sent them to you doesn't get online to complain or call you and demand to know why you have read through their catalogue or placed an order yet. Authors do. But you're right, I could simply close to new submissions, which I have for at least the months of December and January. But how does that help authors in general? If many agents were to take the suggestions you offer, there would actually be fewer opportunities for authors to find an agent. However, if reading fees were not verboten, perhaps the money generated would go toward hiring help to get more read, not less.

As for office supplies, I pay for my own, but for those required to submit my clients' works, I do charge back, as do many agents and every book publicist I know. I'm in the representation business, not the office supply business. Without an agent, an author would have to pay for such expenses, after all.

Your Devil's Advocate,
Andy

Actually, I think this whole thing is ***-backwards. The agent, while busting his butt reading, is really helping not only the authors, but on a grander scale, the publishers. After all, without them, all this slush would sit on the publisher's desk. No one would ever think of paying a publisher to look at their stuff, but it's up for debate with agents? Why is that? The only difference, really is the location of the slush pile.

Personally, I like it when agents ask for queries and synopsis. I know, not everyone likes writing them. But I can send them cheaper, they're shorter and easier to read. I got a turnaround time of one week, snail mail from the last agent I queried. (Fortunately, it was a request for chapters )

I know Barry Goldblatt now only takes queries. On paper, snail mail. Easy way to limit what you get in the mail. No fees required. No unsolicted pages.

Of course, that puts the burden on the author to know how to write one. Which they should anyway. That's not an outrageous thing to ask.

Playing devil's advocate here, because I'm not 'for or against' the fee thing in theory.

However, Andy, you state several times how a reading fee might cut out those who don't pay close attention to who they are submitting to. Do you REALLY believe that?

Heck, it might even make the problem worse, although you'd be richer for their stupidity. They may just figure that since they're paying you, who cares what you WANT.

Andrew,

I didn't perceive Susan's post as attacking you. The way I read it, she was giving an example of a fee charge. However, I also believe she made a valid point about authors being the product. I truly do understand that a lot of agents are overwhelmed with submissions, most not very good, but let me propose this (at the risk of a snarky response): You mentioned that a writer who couldn't afford ink, toner and reading fees shouldn't write. (or cut the cable to pay for it) How about this? Take ten writers who have written novels they wish to submit. 8 of those 10 have written complete and utter drivel, but have the means to pay for reading fees. The other 2 have beautifully written prose, but due to overwhelming circumstances (sudden and expensive medical bills for a family member) can't afford the extra $50-$60 to submit, though they dream of being published. Would that same statement be given? Should they give up their dream of being an author because they can't afford the fees? What does this say about the future of the industry if only the drivel writers can afford to be reviewed?