2.) Money and prestige go hand in hand. Response time doesn't matter...and I never ever query. I think it's annoying.
3.) Pro markets, and semi-pro based on exposure. Apex Digest may not pay the big bucks, but it's carried in B&N and Books-A-Million, so more folks have a chance to come across it.
4.) If money is all that matters, then print vs. online doesn't. Print has prestige...and a shelf life. I love the fact that anytime anyone wants to read my Intergalactic Medicine Show story, they can get it online.
5.) I don't know that I could name 10 markets off the top of my head, but sure. I have no problem submitting to the ones I can think of. I'm just bad about submitting because I hate rejection.
6.) When I was 16 I sent a poem to The New Yorker, just so I could say I'd been rejected by The New Yorker. Don't sell yourself short. EVER.
[Edited because I misunderstood #5.]
[This message has been edited by Alethea Kontis (edited May 24, 2007).]
posted
Ditto Alethea. And, as Miss Snark says - wait, used to say - hold on, wiping a tear from my eyes. Ahem, as Miss Snark used to say, "Write well, query widely", only you can change it to "Write well, submit widely".
Posts: 52 | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Start with the best markets, what's the point of working your way up? If you start at the bottom and get accepted you will never know if a better paying mag would have bought it.
Response time to me does not matter and generally prestige=money - the more prestigious the market, the better the money (generally, there are exceptions.)
Ellison makes a good point about getting paid for your writing. The printer of the magazine gets paid, editor gets paid, supplier of paper gets paid - but the one who makes the magazine possible and hence paves the way for those people getting paid does not get paid? That's rediculous. One of the first submissions I ever made resulted in a nice check from the publisher. Ever since then I've had a dim view of writing something for little or nothing. If you don't think your writing is worth compensation, why send it? Of course there is the alternative view that at least your work will receive exposure and be read (hopefully) by many people. But personally, I'm not sure that trade off is worth it.
I keep sending until the markets I aim for are exhausted.
I don't avoid pro-markets because if I feel the work is not there yet I don't send it out.
No preference over inline and print.
[This message has been edited by nitewriter (edited May 24, 2007).]
posted
1. I use the Writers and Artists Handbook to decide who I submit to.
2. Start with the best - the best of those who are accepting submissions and work down from there. I find response time varies. Some can be a couple of weeks, some can be months but that doesn't bother me or affect who I submit to.
3. I would send to pro and semi-pro. The bigger the better.
4. I have had stories published in small-press anthologies, and have paid to buy the books [sucker]. That was a long time ago and would never do it again. The most I've ever got from writing [to date] is a small amount for a poem. I would never submit if I didn't beleive I would get paid for it. I've put in the hard work - why should every one else but me get paid for it? I've never submitted or had anything published on-line, but that's probably because I don't know any on-line markets that will pay for a story.
5. I would submit until all avenues are exhausted - unless those left expected me to put money in for printing.
6. I have sent to pro markets - actually had one request a sample but didn't get any further than that. I would submit to them again despite receiving rejection letters. If you never try, you'll never know.
posted
I stick with the so-called "pro" markets, which limits me to about three or four. I'm suspicious of a couple of others out there (anything out of DNA Publishing, for one). I'm suspicious of Writers of the Future, too, for different reasons. I don't really want to submit anything via e-mail, though I'll be flexible about that...
Posts: 8809 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
2. Response times do matter. I am impatient but that's not the reason response times matter. My writing keeps improving at a steady rate. If I have to wait a year to get a story rejected, chances are that when I try to review it it will be so bad comparing to what I'm writing at the moment that I won't feel like going through it at all. My stories have a shelf life. The stories that I write now feel good if they're published now. If not, I tend to trunk them. Besides, you could always be dead tomorrow. Gather your rosebuds and all that.
3. Email subs. I live in Europe. I don't sub to non-paying markets and, for the same reason, I don't like investing huge amounts of money in writing. This includes stamps. It costs me almost 7 bucks to mail a 5000 word story to the USA. I'd rather buy a book at that price. I am mailing manuscripts now, but I try to limit it to one or two a month.
4. I'll sub to any market that pays. I've subbed to token markets when their rates where ok for what I was sending them. Ie: maybe they pay 10 bucks for anything over 2000 words (which isn't much), but if they pay 3 bucks for micro fic and your story is 150 words, well, what can you expect?
5. No, I'm not scared by big markets. Chances are all the misspelling dimwits who can't follow guidelines aren't intimidated, so my correctly formatted manuscript isn't going to be the worst thing that passes through the editor's office.
posted
Yeah, response times matter to me, too. I'd prefer a turnaround time of two weeks and under (F & SF, the last time I submitted) to one that's over three months (Asimov's, which I sent my story to right after it came back from F & SF).
Strictly speaking, one market has held on to one of my stories since 1975---really, I know the MS got lost somewhere, possibly 'cause I got the address wrong.
Printer-friendly view of this topic
