I read somewhere recently (probably on a link posted here, but I can't remember) that it's better to go with a mid-size publishing company if you're not well known, because if you go with a large publishing company, your book is a lot more likely to go out of print before it has a chance of success. Do you think this is good advice?

If so, I assume the agent is the first step in this process. Is it better to start my queries with the agents who have gone with smaller publishing companies? Perhaps even agents who work with specific publishing companies?

Of course, in the end, I understand that my options are limited by circumstances beyond my control, but I've done my best with this novel, and I want to begin my agent search in the same fashion, so the answers to these questions and any related advice would be highly welcomed!

Melanie

quote:

---

I have that excited/scared feeling. 98% excited, 2% scared. Or it could be the other way around.

---

Janet Reid is the Query Shark, and owner of Fine Print Literary Management.

http://queryshark.blogspot.com

Nathan Bransford is with the San Francisco branch of Curtis Brown, Ltd. literary agency.

http://blog.nathanbransford.com

About the OSC article, I have read on many other writing pages answer to a similar question and in general they say, most big name authors who are giving that advice have not had to break into the market for a very long time. Also, if you look at the date, the advice was given over ten years ago. The publishing world has changed since then.

I have a draft of my novel complete, just revising- which feels a lot like rewriting. The few chapters I have rewritten are so much stronger then when they started though. I am not yet ready to send it through critters.

Right now, I am debating what name I want to use when I submit. Some agents want you to have a webpage before they submit, so I am thinking of doing that once I have a good polished manuscript. Ideally, I would just use first name and last name for the webpage, but I have choices. For first name, I have a unique first name, which I am told is not obviously gendered. And then I have the name everyone actually calls me (my facebook and e-mail actually use that name). For last name, I have maiden and married- legally I kept mine as like a second middle name. Married name is easy to remember, but a Y- so would be on the bottom row everywhere. Maiden name is a bit more boring and is also the name of a pretzel company (nice solid German name), but an S might be better placed for promotional reason.n And then of course, I have to decide what to do with the middle name- which I always thought would be cool to go buy, but was never able to make that catch on. Maybe this is my chance.

I know there was plenty of talk about this subject sometime before but I would still like to get the info here please, if it's not too much trouble.

quote:

---

Are you quoting "Armageddon"?

---

quote:

---

My finished story is a novelette. It has 13k words (can change but not drastically). This goes into the short story marker, correct? If so, will I also be sending around query letters? Or are rules different?

---

As someone who isn’t even planning to write a novel for the next couple of years, I should probably be taken with a grain of salt, but I tend to support those who say OSC’s advice is a bit out of date in the current market. From everything I’ve read (and I’m a big fan of both the agents Extrinsic links to, so my advice may be biased), an agent is essential. Apart from the growing number of publishers that don’t take unagented submissions, my opinion is that a good agent helps your writing career in many ways beyond getting you a contract.

Anyway, my only advice is that it’s important to get a good agent. I’ve read it in quite a few blogs that no agent is better than a bad agent.

I believe Rachelle Gardner (linked on Nathan Bransford’s blog) has a post on what a good agent should do. Absolute Write also has a bewares and background check’s section which is essential for checking out an agent and their track record.

I’ve also heard the 100 rejections rule on various blogs.

MartinV, as Meredith said, you’d submit your novelette directly to a market. At 13,000 words it will restrict your markets a little bit (there’s not as large a market for 10K words plus), but there’s definitely no need to go through an agent.

Regards,

Nick

According to my notes, I started the first story I submitted on July 8th, 1975---and it was rejected four times by December 12th of that same year, after which I retired it---and by which time I'd written several more and was sending them out. (It wasn't the first story I wrote---I never submitted that anywhere, mostly because it fell between some cited word lengths the magazines were looking for.)

I remember the idea, vaguely---it seems kinda interesting to me, even now, even though it's not particularly original. But I'm sure my handling of it was clumsy in the extreme. (The manuscript still exists, but is less accessable than the turning-brown file card I typed out my submissions record on.)

quote:

---

Agents are starting to toward the no simultaneous submission trend with queries. I've encountered a few who say don't. As with all markets, checking and following submission guidelines is a good idea.

---

Yes, always check submission guidelines. Everybody seems to want something different, for one thing. Some only want the query letter. Some also want a synopsis and/or anything from two to fifty sample pages. (Those usually want it sent snail mail, too, which gets expensive.)

So far, I've only encountered one agent who wanted to be told if I was making simultaneous submissions. (That was probably the most respected agent on this coast.) I would frankly tend away from any that required an exclusive at the query stage. Though I'd be happy to give them a short exclusive on a requested partial.

But about half the agents don't even reply to a query unless they're interested, including the agent above who would have preferred an exclusive query. You know that you've been rejected when you haven't heard anything in eight weeks. If you can only send out a query every two months, and you're likely to get twenty to a hundred rejections before you find an agent--well, you do the math.

Fair is fair. If they want to have the exclusive chance to read the query, then they should be willing to send an actual reply (which can still be a form rejection) within a reasonable amount of time. Otherwise, I'm not going to deal with them. [/rant]

quote:

---

Fair is fair. If they want to have the exclusive chance to read the query, then they should be willing to send an actual reply (which can still be a form rejection) within a reasonable amount of time. Otherwise, I'm not going to deal with them.

---

I agree. Some published writers have the belief that an agent is YOUR employee, not the other way around. Imagine how long it would take to fill a job position if you could only interview once every two months. Sorry, no thanks.

If this becomes the norm (no simultaneous agent queries) then it will become even more difficult to get published. First, publishers eliminated the slush pile. This made it appear that getting an agent was a necessity (much debate about this topic even now). Now, agents want exclusives on queries. Exclusives on fulls I could somewhat accept but not the query process. Give me a break.

The above-mentioned unnamed agency takes its time with queries because they're evaluated by a committee process. They invest time and personnel and resources and ask for patience because they do and because they can. They do place manuscripts with the big publishers for large advances. However, exclusive querying of agents is still a professional courtesy, not a must.

Why?

Bigger publishers have bigger budgets--they pay you more and give you more PR. And from what I've learned you're not going to be removed from shelves any quicker. In fact, you're likely to sell more because they have bigger distribution. Yes, you may be just one of many authors, but depending on the company, that may mean something or nothing.

Besides, going out of print has to do with sales. You don't sell, then the bookstores take your book off the shelves and return them. It's THEIR decision to model (keep in in stock past the stores new release period which is 6-10 weeks, depending in the store, and can be longer for independents) your book or not. Not the publisher's.

Stephenie Meyer went with Little Brown. Big old honking deal. You're not going to get that with a small publisher. Larry Correia, me, Ken Scholes, Diana Rowland, Aprilynne Pike, Brandon Sanderson, Dan Wells, etc. etc. all new authors, all going with one of the big publishers in their genre.

As for agents and rejections. Here's one data point. Book 1. I queried 30+ agents and publishers. A few asked for partials. Nobody bit. Book 2. I queried 50 agents. Vast majority passed. 8 didn't ever repond. But I did get 9 to 10 requests for more. Got an agent who eventually sold the book for a nice amount above the average at a place I couldn't get in over the transom.

So you will not ever write a book everyone wants to read. Your job is to find your audience, starting with agent and editor. And getting an agent IS helpful. You can still sell without one, but many houses won't even look at you without an agent.

Average first book contact $: http://www.tobiasbuckell.com/2005/10/05/author-advance-survey-version-20/

More advice on getting agents: http://johndbrown.com/writers/finding-your-audience-and-getting-paid/

Don't fail to go to Buckell's link above. Here's just a taste of the goodies he's got data on.

quote:

---

First Novels: Agented vs. Unagented:

58% of our first time novelists had an agent, the other 42% sold the book without an agent, and a high number indicate they got agents right after or during the sale of the book.

The range in agented advances is from $1500 to $40,000

The median agented advance is $6000 (the average is $7500)

The range in unagented advances is from $0 to $15000

The median unagented advance is $3500 (the average is $4051)

---

quote:

---

You can query more than one agent at a time. Personally, I would target half a dozen or so at a time. That way, if the query is just falling flat, you have a chance to polish it again. Trust me, getting the query right and the synopsis is the hard part in this. It makes taking the rejection look almost easy by comparison

---

One caveat to my earlier statement. It is not okay to query multiple agents at the same agency at the same time. Serially, yes. That is, you wait until the first agent at that agency rejects you. Then you can try another at the same agency. But not at the same time.

And I just now got rejection #23 on THE SHAMAN'S CURSE.

http://www.deanwesleysmith.com/?p=357

Furthermore, by following Kris' and Dean's advice on this, you limit yourself to only those editors who read unsolicited manuscripts. When I was shopping my SFF, that limited me to the slushies at Baen, Daw, and Tor. Unless, of course, I went to a conference, met an editor, pitched, and got a request. But then you have to be going to MANY cons to be able to meet all the appropriate editors at all the other houses, let alone the non-slush editors at the ones who do accept slush, and succeed in getting requests. It's possible to get requests this way, and I recommend going to conferences to do just that. But I don't think it's very efficient. Nor is it the only way.

An author is trying to sell something. I don't know of any business where I'd want to purposely exclude half or more of my potential customers (all those non-slush, non-unsolicited editors at big houses) when trying to sell.

However, if you get a decent agent, you suddenly get access. And your book goes out of the slush into a pile that suggests to the editor at least one pro thinks it's commercially viable.

Given Buckell's stats and people I know (Larry Correia, Brandon Sanderson), it's clear you do not have to have an agent to sell a book. But I think it's also clear that there are multiple routes to getting an editor's notice. There's no reason to exclude one of those routes. I'm very glad I didn't.

That makes a lot of sense. And you know Kris and Dean know the industry. I guess they're speaking out about limiting yourself to just agents, when both roads are just as good. From Buckell's stats it appears a lot of those with agents on the first book got them as/after they got hits. So going the editor route is obviously a winning method.

quote:

---

This is some amazing stuff. Thank you very much, especially those of you with actual experience with this sort of thing. It's a whole new world, and I begin to think that writing it was the easy part.

---

JMO It was certainly the fun part.

http://www.deanwesleysmith.com/?p=720

Dean tends to offer a fair amount of 'outlaw' advice that flies in the face of conventional wisdom.

Sigh.

It's interesting that HarperCollins has a web "slush" pile (authonomy.com). I'd be very interested to know how posting your work to that site affects your ability to sell your rights. Since it appears that all those works are public without a login then they could potentially be considered published, especially since it appears these novels are posted in their entirety.