- Joined
- Feb 12, 2005
- Messages
- 4,680
- Reaction score
- 2,056
- Location
- In the resistance
- Website
- www.claireodell.com
-
Guest please check The Index before starting a thread.
What would that prove? An author could have one book which sold hundreds of thousands of copies. Or several books which sold perhaps a few hundred copies each. That depends on a lot of factors, including the type of book (e.g. poetry collection vs. YA dystopian romance). What would the number of books and number of sales have to do with paying agents up front?
- Joined
- Jun 27, 2007
- Messages
- 2,548
- Reaction score
- 228
Old Hack, just as an aside, I've seen a lot of very highly respected agents, who do not call themselves ebook agents, getting a lot of digital only and digital first deals for romance authors in recent years.
I've seen that just from going to their websites.
Last edited:
Ginger, I agree. Good agents get their clients good deals, no matter what the format.
I struggle with agents who only sell to e-publishers, though, because I see no reason for writers to be restricted in that way.
I struggle with agents who only sell to e-publishers, though, because I see no reason for writers to be restricted in that way.
That's my take on the issue, too. My agent handles digital sales. She also handles print and subsidiary rights, in multiple genres. More importantly to me, she has years of experience and contacts at many publishers.
With a digital-only agent, I'd worry my work was limited to only those platforms. I have firsthand evidence that at least one digital-only agent was so clueless (even about her chosen genre) that she probably harmed more than helped one of her clients.
With a digital-only agent, I'd worry my work was limited to only those platforms. I have firsthand evidence that at least one digital-only agent was so clueless (even about her chosen genre) that she probably harmed more than helped one of her clients.
Sorry it has taken so long to get back here to respond, and I see that in the meantime some others have made the same points I would make.
While I am a writer, I earn my living as an editor, so I also see from "the other side" how authors are getting published these days. One route is self-publishing, which is typically not that successful without professional editing and promotion. Editors don't cost much, but publicists are expensive. Another other route is via an agent. But these routes are overlapping now more than they used to. For example, it is not uncommon for publishers to obtain books from publicists the way they previously did from agents. They want to see the track record of the writer--not just how they write but how they self-promote. I know agents who have left the business because they can no longer compete in this environment. My sense is that this is the direction things are headed. Not to say that I personally like any of this--just that it is a reality!
Sorry, you took my words literally. It was my way of asking how successful authors who did not put any money into their books were.
Good editors are expensive.
I've never heard of a publisher acquiring a book from a publicist. Do you have a few concrete examples you could share?
Book scouts are a different matter, of course. Might this be a difference of terminology rather than opinion?
Every week, probably every day, good publishers sign up writers who have no clue about how to self-promote. Publishers want good books: an author who can also self-promote is a bonus, but it's not essential.
So do I. They were mostly not very good at being agents, though.
I--and many of the literary agents I know--feel that things in publishing are changing, but then again, they always have. I think many agents will offer more services to their author-clients as time passes: but I don't think that any reputable agents will start charging fees to their clients just for representing them. That is a direct conflict of interests, and I can't see any good agent working in that way.
Well, yeah. I assumed this was a serious discussion, and therefore I took what people said literally.
And I'm not sure the number of books someone currently has published is an indicator of how successful they are (this was part of your original question, "how many books they currently have published").
If an author releases five books through an amateur micropress which allows them to sink out of sight despite the author paying for publicity, that author is not likely to be more successful than, say, a debut author whose book came out with a splash from Penguin Random House. Even though, in terms of the number of titles published, Author 1 wins hands down.
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2005
- Messages
- 4,680
- Reaction score
- 2,056
- Location
- In the resistance
- Website
- www.claireodell.com
To repeat my question from before:
Could you name these agencies that charge upfront, instead of taking a commission?
Yes, we'd like to know those fee-charging agencies.
In answer to another comment, I'd rather pay a great editor than a publicist. Solid editing gives my work its best foundation. The editors I am considering for a self-publishing venture charge between $70 and $200 per hour, but they have the skills and track record to merit it.
Whereas, hiring a publicist to hype an already inferior manuscript seems to be self-defeating in the long run.
In answer to another comment, I'd rather pay a great editor than a publicist. Solid editing gives my work its best foundation. The editors I am considering for a self-publishing venture charge between $70 and $200 per hour, but they have the skills and track record to merit it.
Whereas, hiring a publicist to hype an already inferior manuscript seems to be self-defeating in the long run.
Last edited:
I would never say "literal" equates with "serious." Presumably people who come here with serious intentions can engage in abstract thinking and use metaphorical language.
That said, I did not expect this level of snark. I personally find it stultifying, so I will be going elsewhere for more open-minded discussions...
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2006
- Messages
- 17,872
- Reaction score
- 4,664
- Location
- dunking doughnuts at Dunkin' Donuts
If anyone can tell me what's metaphorical about "I'd also ask anyone who says they would not pay to publish (in other words, have not paid an agent, not paid a publicist, have not paid to SP), how many books they currently have published and how many sales..." I would appreciate it.
What can I say? I wasn't even trying.
Make sure it's some place where people will swallow unsupported claims and vague statements.
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2005
- Messages
- 4,680
- Reaction score
- 2,056
- Location
- In the resistance
- Website
- www.claireodell.com
Hey, what about answering my question? A simple link to the fee-charging agencies you mentioned would be helpful.
Especially after six posts in nine years.
There. There's some snark.
Discussions of 'literal' and 'metaphorical' aside, I don't see a problem in researching the different ways the publishing industry works - in all its confusing glory. There may be a few rare occasions when paying upfront fees to a literary agent may be a good decision. Sometimes paying a vanity publisher may be the best thing an author can do for their work.
But in general, with the weight of history and lots of negative testimonials - neither path is considered particularly safe for inexperienced authors.
This is what AW has been about for me: getting a lot of solid information about writing and publishing, from people who have already learned it. Maybe not the safe, happy, self-empowering misinformation I wanted to hear, but what I needed to hear.
There. There's some snark.
Discussions of 'literal' and 'metaphorical' aside, I don't see a problem in researching the different ways the publishing industry works - in all its confusing glory. There may be a few rare occasions when paying upfront fees to a literary agent may be a good decision. Sometimes paying a vanity publisher may be the best thing an author can do for their work.
But in general, with the weight of history and lots of negative testimonials - neither path is considered particularly safe for inexperienced authors.
This is what AW has been about for me: getting a lot of solid information about writing and publishing, from people who have already learned it. Maybe not the safe, happy, self-empowering misinformation I wanted to hear, but what I needed to hear.
I've yet to be published but I've done extensive research on the industry. One of the biggest no no's is going with an agent who charges service fees. Agents are paid on commission. When they land you a publishing contract, they get a cut of your royalties. Any agent who wants money from you up front...
..RUN!!!! Nine times out of ten it's a scam. You pay their "service fee" and then they just can't find you a publisher. They'll keep hitting you up for that fee though. Same rule goes for publishers. You skip getting an agent and submit your work to a publisher directly, you pay nothing out of pocket. They pay you. They make their money from sales and give you a percentage. If they ask for a service fee....RUN!!!
There's nothing an agent does that a writer can't do for themselves, but their raison d'etre is that they handle a lot of the major responsibilities for getting a book to market that would otherwise consume a great deal of a writer's time, tasks that writers may not have the experience, ability, or time to be able to handle the way they need to be.
It's rather how like someone might decide to install a nice home theater, buy the components, and then hire an electrician to do the wiring, while another has the skillset to do it all themselves. There's nothing wrong with the first person doing it that way, especially if it's in recognition that they don't have the ability to do it themselves, and trying is probably going to make a terrible hash of it all.
All kinds of publishers, in particular the BIG HOUSES, won't even look at unagented manuscripts.
caw
Agents do all sorts of things that writers can't do for themselves.
They get books looked at by editors at the top houses and they sell foreign and subsidiary rights; and authors with good representation routinely earn more than authors without. Those are the most significant differences, but there are plenty more.
And they don't get books to market. That's the publisher's job.
Technically just about true, but how many writers can find their way through a royalties report or find and negotiate a foreign market deal?
Point. I should have made it much clearer that I meant a very qualified, 'technically speaking.'
I should have come up with a better analogy, like how a master chef _could_ raise a cow from birth, slaughter it himself, grow and grind his own spices, etc, just to ensure that he delivers the most perfect steak possible, but there's a reason why one who actually did that would be considered an amazing oddity.
Not even that. Farm-to-table chefs are not a fad anymore.
Digression aside, a capable agent can do things that a lot of writers cannot - or don't have the time or contacts to do. It's not easy to get an agent's attention. But it can be worth trying, for the advantages.
I like Dean Wesley Smith's blog, and celebrate that he's opened a lot of discussions on authors controlling every aspect of their career. But that is informed self-publishing, and it's hard work if you do it right. So many people don't, and it shows.
I'm invoking a Libra's privilege to waffle a bit: I'm neither firmly in the Must Be Agented, or Must Be Lone Wolf camp. There are merits to both, hence the need to do proper research.
Digression aside, a capable agent can do things that a lot of writers cannot - or don't have the time or contacts to do. It's not easy to get an agent's attention. But it can be worth trying, for the advantages.
I like Dean Wesley Smith's blog, and celebrate that he's opened a lot of discussions on authors controlling every aspect of their career. But that is informed self-publishing, and it's hard work if you do it right. So many people don't, and it shows.
I'm invoking a Libra's privilege to waffle a bit: I'm neither firmly in the Must Be Agented, or Must Be Lone Wolf camp. There are merits to both, hence the need to do proper research.
Dang it, I'm going to beat this analogy until it means what I'm trying to say!
So, when I say that 'there's nothing an agent can do that a writer can't do for themselves,' I mean it in pretty much the same way that, 'there's nothing a contractor can do when building a house that a person can't do for themselves,' but there's a reason why nobody looks askance at someone who hired someone who was a professional at building homes to build them a house, instead of picking up a shovel and doing it themselves - not just the physical parts of it, but knowing codes and regulations and all of the detail work.
Or maybe I should just reduce it down to the non-analogy components and say, 'There's a lot of hard work in getting something published, and a very good reason why so many people work with someone whose job is doing that work."
There. No more cows.
So, when I say that 'there's nothing an agent can do that a writer can't do for themselves,' I mean it in pretty much the same way that, 'there's nothing a contractor can do when building a house that a person can't do for themselves,' but there's a reason why nobody looks askance at someone who hired someone who was a professional at building homes to build them a house, instead of picking up a shovel and doing it themselves - not just the physical parts of it, but knowing codes and regulations and all of the detail work.
Or maybe I should just reduce it down to the non-analogy components and say, 'There's a lot of hard work in getting something published, and a very good reason why so many people work with someone whose job is doing that work."
There. No more cows.
A good agent is a blessing.
A bad agent is a curse.
There may be a middle ground; I've not found it. Yes, you can do without an agent, but a good agent has close personal relationships with editors and knows what they like and can call them up and get your ms. put in the editor's own hands.
A good agent knows what your book will fetch as an advance, and has an idea of the potential future sales and rights worth in terms of money in your hands.
A good agent will sell your book while you write another one.
A good agent is like a top-notch defensive goalie, and protects you from the hockey puck of fate, so that you can go on writing.
A bad agent is a curse.
There may be a middle ground; I've not found it. Yes, you can do without an agent, but a good agent has close personal relationships with editors and knows what they like and can call them up and get your ms. put in the editor's own hands.
A good agent knows what your book will fetch as an advance, and has an idea of the potential future sales and rights worth in terms of money in your hands.
A good agent will sell your book while you write another one.
A good agent is like a top-notch defensive goalie, and protects you from the hockey puck of fate, so that you can go on writing.