submit your "best" story to the "pro" market, then submit several of your "lesser" stories to the smaller markets. that way, if your "best" gets rejected, you have all those "lesser" stories still out there, plus you can get your "best" story into the lesser market as well, possibly getting published in the smaller markets. if your story gets accepted, then great! you have a story in the pros!

just because you might fail is no reason to try.
dont know who said that, but...

in the words of Thomas Edison: Weve found a thousand ways that dont work, the trick is to find one that does. (paraphrasing there.)

My comment regarding 'objective facts' was really to highlight the fact that everything is subjective; there is no such thing as an objective fact...

We can have 'agreements' with people, but they aren't objective facts just because they seem to be...

quote:

---

My comment regarding 'objective facts' was really to highlight the fact that everything is subjective; there is no such thing as an objective fact...

---

Well, there are things that are objective facts, like the fact that gravity works and the fact that water is wet. But pretty much everything we discuss on here is subjective...the "quality" of writing is subjective, the choices of editors of what to publish or not are based primarily or entirely on subjective things etc...and thats why I have problems when people (more than one as well, this isn't all aimed at one person) come in and start making objective statements about those subjective things. And yes I know, your supposed to just assume they are saying its there opinion...but when you say that to them and they continue to insist that no its not their opinion its a FACT, sorry I have a problem with that.

quote:

---

Okay, okay, Merlion's right, I'm wrong. Everybody please follow Merlion's strategy of submitting to lesser markets and working your way up.

---

Wow. You really have listened to a single thing I've typed, have you? First, I've stated repeatdly that what you've just said is not my sole "strategy"...I don't really have one in fact, I pretty much shop everything everwhere.

Second, my primary point especially for the last couple of posts has been that there is no "right" or "wrong" in this because it is SUBJECTIVE and the problem I have with your statements isn't your personal submission stratgey its your insistence that your personal stratgey is the ONLY "right" one and all others are wrong/bad/less wise/not going to work.

If the objective is to be published in a pro market (this was what was originally stated), and the two strategies are:

1. submit everything to pro (print) markets first, then work down

vs.

2. do not submit pro markets until making some number of sales to small markets

then there are two possibilities if you follow (1): either you sell to one of those pro markets or you don't. If you do, then you have met your objective. If you don't, then you are in exactly the same place as if you had followed (2), except that you are perhaps a month or two behind because whatever you sold to the small markets got to them a month or two later from having been sent to the pro market(s) first.

I can't see anything at all that would make (2) superior in terms of achieving the stated objective.

However, if you have other objectives, such as saving money on postage, not wanting to buy paper, etc., you would need to weigh the two objectives against each other. Indeed, if you expect to be send out something like 50 stories before your first pro sale, the expense might not seem worth it, for the sake of slightly increasing the probability of a pro sale early on.

Personally, I regard paper, ink, and postage as part of the cost of being a writer. All occupations and hobbies have costs. This is not the largest of them, by any means - most of my money goes into books, fiction and also books on writing, and magazines like Locus.

Eric, I wasn't trying to say you were wrong. I actually agree with you more than Merlion in this particular case. My point was that you were both repeating the same arguments back and forth to each other. I'm all for discussion, but it seemed more like an argument at that point.

My first submission was to a pro-rate market. It sold. It's been reprinted in an anthology and an audiobook of that anthology and has earned me more, I think, than any other single story I've sold (something around $400 in total, IIRC, for a 2500-word piece).

Imagine if I'd sent that out to a market that paid $5 per story.

The idea that you can "build up" some kind of publishing "credit" from smaller publications that will stand you in good stead with pro magazines is, I'm afraid, utter nonsense. The reverse, however, is true - publish at big name markets and you are likelier to sell stories on to "smaller" markets.

A newly emergent author or any forum member telling a struggling emerging writer she's wrong is reprehensible, to my sensibilities. Not much in the scale of these discussion things is more likely to get one's back up regardless of the rightness or wrongness of imperatively presented advice. And that is hurtful and wrong.

Edited to add: The advice is sound; the method of delivery is not. For a wordcrafter to ignore method of delivery calls into question the validity of the advice.

quote:

---

If you look at many writers' bibliographies, you will see that their first publications were in smaller venues, and then they started selling to more prestigious markets until they were selling to the pro markets. But that does not mean they submitted to the markets in that order.

---

quote:

---

No one said the big name authors published at big venues first then small ones. What was said was that it's more likely most pro authors start off in smaller pubs and eventually get into the bigger mags is that they start submitting to the big mags first, but don't get accepted at them till their skills have improved enough and their names have become recognised enough for them to get accepted at the pro venues.

---

Ok, so if this is the case, then why does the order matter so much? It indicates, again, that most people...not all mind, I actually realize that all things are not universal and set in stone but MOST brand new authors don't get published in the major markets first anyway. Their first sales are generally in "lesser" markets, whether they sent it to bigger ones first or not. Thats why I said six of one half dozen of the other.

Now yes, I fully understand that a story sold to a "lesser" market isn't getting sold to a "greater" one...but since for a begining writer it most likely wouldn't have been anyway, whats the difference? And if your always writing and completing new material, how is it a terrible blow to your career to "sacrifice" a few of your earlier bits to "lesser" markets and have SOMETHING to your name early on if thats what you wish to do?

I think that was really what Simon was basically telling me or where he was coming from...your probably not going to sell to the biggies right away, so go ahead and get SOME sales then move on although I want to emphasize one more time that neither he to me nor I to anyone else have said NOT to submit first or submit early works to "bigger" markets or that "bottom up" is the "best" or even a "better" stratgey, only that its a valid one like all the others.

And again, one more time I've never said I don't submit to professional markets. I did, and do, and have. So far, I've recieved only rejections from them, and rarely if ever any sort of feedback. But I continue. I also submit to semi pro and token payment markets. Whenever I finish a piece, I submit it to whichever place that 1) I don't already have a piece with and 2) I think is most likely to have a chance of accepting it. Now that said, within those 2 boundaries if there are multiple markets that fit them, I will go with the highest paying and/or the ones that seem to have some prestige first...I also try to do a lot of simultaneous submissions.

And also again, the biggest issue I've had in this thread is people elevating their choices, opinions and experiences to the level of fact and being told essentially that a friend who is also, by most people definition a professional writer (moreso, in fact, than anyone on this site that I'm aware of save maybe Kathleen) is giving me "bad" advice.

And yes I realize many would say just ignore it, but being told I'm doing something wrong when 1) the thing isnt a thing where there is a right or wrong and 2) the people doing the telling think I'm doing something that I'm not is rather irritating.

Perhaps I should start a new thread about how people define "professional" both in terms of markets and in terms of what constitues a "professional writer" as I am rather curious now...

quote:

---

The idea that you can "build up" some kind of publishing "credit" from smaller publications that will stand you in good stead with pro magazines is, I'm afraid, utter nonsense.

---

First, on advice giving. Being published does not make one an expert on being published. And even if it did, have you ever seen experts agree on anything? Ever? Of course not, so there is no One True Submission Strategy That Fits All Writers, All Stories.

Also, on advice giving: being right doesn't mean your advice will be followed. First, you have to be perceived to be right; without hard data on the experiences of many, many writers, all you have is your own experience, a single data point, subjective, as Merlion says.

Further, to give accurate advice, you have to know all the objectives and aspirations, stated and unstated, of the person you're giving advice to. That's not possible. So advice giving is futile. The best you can do is share your experience, recount what works for you, and hope that others may find it helpful.

And, still on advice giving, let's downgrade it to influencing people and their decisions. If you want to influence people, you have to express yourself in a manner that they will be inclined to listen to; shouting 'no, no, no' and declaring their honestly-held opinions 'utter nonsense' or 'wrong headed' is guaranteed not to influence, and more likely to intimidate and inflame.

Thus, I agree with extrinsic when he says, "A least sensible method of courteous discussion is to make and argue imperative and/or declarative statements based upon subjective opinions."

A year ago I would have said my submission strategy was as Eric directs, to start with the big 3 and work "down" (in the absence of circulation figures for the on-line 'zines, how do we know they're still the 'big' 3?). But I waited about six months for one of them not to respond (I think the rejection got lost in the post) and stopped subbing. So now I have several stories ready to sub, and almost have the energy to start subbing again. I won't send them all to the big 3 first, and not just to avoid multiple subs...

The big 3 are primarily American mags, and I've realized that some of my stories just do not suit the American markets, because they are too "British". For them I will first try to find British homes. (No, I don't want to revise them for American audiences. I don't think they'll work so well, for they rely on allusions to British history and culture.)

Furthermore, the big 3 are SF and F, and I have one or two stories that are not of those genres. For them I'll probably look for other homes; one needs a subversive political market, for example.

Another is a flash piece: I have respect for FFO, I believe there's a chance they'd like it, so I'll send it there first. For me, a credit with FFO would be valuable.

I have one or two other stories which, while I quite like them, aren't good enough for the big 3, and I don't know how to make them better, and they're as good as they'll get despite helpful crits from Hatrack friends. I'll try them with some on-line markets because, as Merlion says, there's a better chance of more-than-a-form rejection. If I can get one or two editors talking to me and helping me with those stories, I'll learn.

quote:

---

I have one or two other stories which, while I quite like them, aren't good enough for the big 3, and I don't know how to make them better, and they're as good as they'll get despite helpful crits from Hatrack friends. I'll try them with some on-line markets because, as Merlion says, there's a better chance of more-than-a-form rejection. If I can get one or two editors talking to me and helping me with those stories, I'll learn.

---

This is a pretty big point about the feedback. And the pyschology in a way too...the larger markets arent nearly as big on feedback, and they are intimidating. More than that as I eluded to in earlier posts I think over emphasis on those markets...which are unlikely to give feedback and likely to reject, can be very discouraging for those just going at it, especially if they are unsure about writing in general.

Honestly, I think there is something to be said for both aproaches, but really I think as with many things, if there is a "best" a mixed aproach might be best. If your starting out and you have 4 finished stories, send 2 to a pro market like Strange Horizons or one of the Big 3 if you right sci fi and don't mind the postage, and send the other two to someplace that might actually tell you why they reject it, like Ideomancer or Allegory.

quote:

---

Also I'm curious for those of you on the "always pros first" end...your saying every story should be sent to a pro market first...all of them? How many tries at pro markets, per story, are acceptable?

---

What I'm saying is that you should decide what the best market (based on pay, circulation, prestige, or whatever criteria you choose to judge what will best help your writing career) where your story might sell and send it there first. It won't necessarily be one of the big 3, or even a pro market. If it's rejected, choose the next best market. Then the next.

quote:

---

The idea that you can "build up" some kind of publishing "credit" from smaller publications that will stand you in good stead with pro magazines is, I'm afraid, utter nonsense.

---

quote:

---

You know this to be true beyond a shadow of a doubt in all cases? If so, how did you come by the knowledge?

---

Well, that's what every pro editor I've ever seen write on the subject has said.

Building up credit from smaller/"lesser" (I hesitate to use the term, but we are talking about a scale towards professionalism here) publications is not necessarily without merit for one as a writer. It may build confidence. It may garner you useful contacts (I've been in TOcs at "lesser" markets alongside recognisable names who also sell to pro markets). But proving you can sell to a $5-per-story market does not impress the editor of a 5c/word market, and pretending it will is specious and dangerous.

In my opinion (dude, you should realise enough about the world by now that anyone who states something even as a hard and absolute fact is just expressing their opinion, they just happen to be doing it forcefully, pobably because they are more fervent about that opinion than others).

Anyone can offer advice in this forum. The wise reader has to judge where that advice is coming from, and whether it is soundly based or not. I came back to using Hatrack specifically because this place helped me before I was ever published. I'm trying to pay it forward by passing on my own experience in the hope that it will help others.

Respect is a dialogue regardless of the relative standing of the participants to each other.

quote:

---

What I'm saying is that you should decide what the best market (based on pay, circulation, prestige, or whatever criteria you choose to judge what will best help your writing career) where your story might sell and send it there first. It won't necessarily be one of the big 3, or even a pro market. If it's rejected, choose the next best market. Then the next.

---

Ok...so if this is the case, I don't understand why if your just starting out, have no experience with editors and feel that the best markets for your stuff, early on, are lesser ones with faster response times and a higher chance of giving feedback (or even actually buying your story) is such horrible advice, or warranted such a dramatic reaction. Mind you, I'm not say thats "the way to go" either...theres a lot of factors that go into that.
I know that for me getting a few personal rejections that were pleasant, encouraging and insightful from minor market editors really helped me especially early on to keep going past the discouragement of constant rejections. And that is really what sort of brought me into this in the begining...I can just see the overpowering focus on professional/high profile markets being intimidating or discouraging for people who are just starting out.

quote:

---

dude, you should realise enough about the world by now that anyone who states something even as a hard and absolute fact is just expressing their opinion, they just happen to be doing it forcefully, pobably because they are more fervent about that opinion than others

---

I guess our experiences have been very different. Because in my experience, especially in the "world" of online discussion, most of the people that make definitive objective statements about subjective things, especially when they continue to do so without even a hint of qualifying or acknowledging that its an opinion after being confronted about it, are in fact saying that what they are saying is in fact objective reality despite its subjectivity.

Its also been my experience that assuming that people are going to know what you mean and how you mean it in all cases, especially online, is unwise and almost always leads to misunderstandings.

quote:

---

Ok...so if this is the case, I don't understand why if your just starting out, have no experience with editors and feel that the best markets for your stuff, early on, are lesser ones with faster response times and a higher chance of giving feedback (or even actually buying your story) is such horrible advice, or warranted such a dramatic reaction.

---

To me, that sounds more like an approach to getting encouragement and validation for your writing than an approach to building a professional writing career. And that's fine, if that's what you're looking for at this point. If rejections from pro venues are too discouraging to you, then this might be the right approach for you, as a way to build up your confidence.

But it will take longer to get into the pro venues using that strategy. You get into the pros by submitting to the pros.

quote:

---

To me, that sounds more like an approach to getting encouragement and validation for your writing than an approach to building a professional writing career.

---

So, those two are in all cases and for all people totally mutually exclusive?

Also...I'm not saying that this IS WHAT YOU MEAN, but that statement could very easily be interpreted as you expressing that if you feel the need to do it that way its beause your somehow lacking in fortitude or your just looking for praise or an "easy way" or some such. I don't know if its intentional or not but a lot of what you say comes off somewhat arrogant and/or condescending. Note that in my other post I was talking about feedback...I did say it is encouraging, but I also said it can improve your knowledge of the ways of editors, which you can use, if you wish, to gear your writing more towards that audience. (most people would just say "it can help you improve your writing" but I dont subscribe to the objectively better/worse dichotomy)

And you do realize, also, that theres more than one definition of a professional writing career? (to which I'm expecting you to state your defintion and insist that its THE definition but I really hope you prove me wrong.)

quote:

---

The reason for my vehement reaction originally was because it sounded to me like you were promoting the idea that people are supposed to work their way up by submitting first to the lower-tier markets in order to build up a publication history that will then help them get into the pro mags. That's just not true.

---

See there it is again...your making a factual statement, but I have no reason to believe it to be universally objectively and always true as you say.

How about presenting some proof that non-pro publications are, as you seem to be saying, more or less meaningless in the context of "building a professional writing career?" Or if not "proof" at least something to actually back up your iron clad assertions that that is the case for everyone, not just your personal experience.

Well, the two kept arguing well into the night. About midnight the rest of us got bored and went to bed while they were still at it. We figured either one or the other would end up out the window by morning, and we didn't really want to be there for that.

extrinsic mentioned a figure for Fictionwise, but I assume that's across all genres, not just F&SF.

Also, in a recent edition of the UK magazine Deathray, there was an interview with OSC where he said that on-line sales of IGMS continue to be disappointing, from which I assume that on-line zine sales are faring no better than print.

Anyone got any figures? Are the "big 3" in fact bigger than on-line?

Flash Fiction Online reports 5,300 visitors a month as of November 2008. Zero paid subscribers. Extended to an annual count, that number of visitors could be at least 60,000.

Excepting how more people now get their news free online than in print, I've not found many other statistics related to online publishing. Online circulation seems to be proprietary information in most business models.

My conclusion is find a way around the tolltakers and circulation soars. I've also wondered if there's a way around the gatekeepers that would put writers' stories out there and merit would be based solely on readers' scrutiny and popular opinion. Baen has gone the farthest in that direction.

quote:

---

Presumptive authority imperatively addressing a supposed inferior poisons a message.

---

One person's "presumptive authority" is another person's contextual information.

Merlion says he has "no evidence" to suggest that he is wrong in believing that a raft of publishing credits at non-pro markets will help his chances of professional publications.

Writers with professional sales and contact with editors of professional markets say otherwise.

Merlion repeats that he still has no evidence.

quote:

---

Got my popcorn and settling in.

---

Wanna borrow my twelve-foot pole, Rich?

Especially when professional writers with contact with editors have given me different advice.

All I'm saying is 1) theres more than one way to establish a professional writing career (whatever definition of that your using) and 2) if your going to offer your opinions, offer them as opinions and if your going to offer "facts" give reasons behind them, sources for the information or something of that kind.

I only said they were meaningless within the context of using them to try and make your work more attractive to an editor of a prozine - because that was the specific point at issue.

I sold a story to one market for $5 (well, in theory I did; I never actually got paid). The story had been out to a number of other markets and hadn't sold - I was working down the chain, not up.

That story, to my knowledge, has never been reviewed or commented on - it might not even have been read - but it was still, in theory, a paying sale (the non-payment is a separate issue, and one I would chase up if it were more than $5!).

I've sold several stories to Every Day Fiction. They earn me $3 a shot. Why do I sub to that market, when (in theory) I have a limit of not selling anything for under 1c/word? Simple; readership. EDF gets 1000+ readers for every story (I'm not sure how many more than that figure it might be by now). That's more than a lot of first novels - certainly way more than self-published first novels. And it feels good to know that the stories I'm writing are actually being READ.

There are any number of reasons to sub to lesser-paying markets. There are even reasons to sub to non-paying markets, though as noted I personally have never yet subbed to a non-paying market and would only break that rule if there were compelling reasons.

If you aren't "ready" for pro markets, by all means publish in what markets will take your work. But improvement will NOT come from selling those stories. Improvement will come from critique groups, from having others analyse your work and analysing the work of others. Thus, over time, you may well be able to sell to pro markets, and that might appear as if you've "worked your way up". But the pro markets are ONLY interested in work of pro quality, and whether you've published 100 stories or none at non-pro markets really won't matter one iota to them.

And there is, after all, only one way to know if you are "ready" for a pro market. As I said before - what if I'd sold "The Box Of Beautiful Things" for $5, instead of earning around $400 for it? 20% or so of my total income from writing has come from that story; the first story I ever submitted to any market, and which sold, right out of the gate. I can't sell to pro markets with any consistency - I'm clearly still working MY way up. Jay Lake explained that the quality of your writing may be like a choppy sea, with peaks and troughs. The peak stories may be pro level but most of your work might be below. The aim is to increase the mean level so that more and more of your output gets above the line.

quote:

---

If the big 3 circulations are each somewhere between 15,000 and 25,000 per month (using Robert's figures earlier in this thread) then, comparing them to 5000 visitors a month, they are still "big" in the SF&F genres, though not nearly as big as they once were. Is that right?

---

In the heyday of pulp digests, 1920s to 1950s, circulation figures for the leaders were in the 300,000s. Successors at the beginning of the 1990s enjoyed figures in the 100,000s.

An average success milestone today for literary journals is generally in the 2,000 subscribers range. They're usually supported by university sponsorships in exchange for student-academic credit and extracurricular activities. However, the 2,000 subscriber count is about where actual printing, production, and handling costs intersect with revenues at break even.

Same number for a shoestring publisher of print digests. Economy of scale benefits at 2,000 copies produced and circulated will be mostly self-supporting and possibly profitable with advertising revenue.

quote:

---

I'm still not understanding. Can you guys go over your arguments again? I think I missed something.

---

LOL.

It seems to me there's an underlying issue here. Are you mad at us for disagreeing with you because of the way we've disagreed, or because you feel you have to justify your own need to submit to 'lesser' markets first? Are you scared of the big markets? I just don't see why it's that unreasonable to advise people to aim high, unless you have some issue with people getting into pro venues.

By the way, I love to argue, but even I know when it's time to move on. This horse is dead; it's no longer a horse, so I would advise us to move onto another horse. Doesn't really matter to me, though, if the advice is taken or not; I'm just throwing it out there.

Too late to swerve (it was too dark to see it in time at freeway speeds), and if we'd tried to hit it we couldn't have done a better job.

Regarding your experience last night. When I was about 15 years old my step-father-for-the-moment was a big NASCAR fan. He had dragged me out, along with my mom and his son and daughter, to some rinky-dink track in the middle of GOB (Good Ol' Boy) country. I'm sure we had to have passed some red-headed snaggletoothed person playing Dueling Banjos to get there. Anyhow, it was during that end of fall, beginning of winter time. I was forced to sit half-frozen on a wooden bleacher for four hours in a cold drizzle to watch beat up cars drive circles around a track. Everytime a group passed, they sprayed us with tiny shreds of warm wet rubber. They topped the night with a demolition derby in the muddy inside area of the track. Yee-haw!

On the way home, I sat in the back seat in wet clothes. We were driving down the highway, most likely way too fast, when a vehicle up ahead began to skid. As we passed it, we hit something and it bounced the entire vehicle up into the air like hitting a speed bump at 65 mph. My step-father decided to keep going. The next day the newspaper's front page told of a hit-and-run the previous night. Although my mom never "saw" the man consciously, she had dreamed that night about hitting a man who was wearing an army-jacket. They drove to the police station, and upon inspection they found evidence under the car to confirm that it was our car that had hit him.

The man, who was wearing an army-jacket, had been hitchhiking when the first vehicle hit him, knocking him up in the air. He had landed just seconds before we drove overtop of him. The vehicle in front had been traveling at around 50 mph. The police said that he was probably dead before he hit the ground, but that didn't make anyone feel any better.

I couldn't stop to check to see if it was dead, as it was on a corner with high hedges all around--the next car would have hit me--too dangerous.