[Agency] Dystel, Goderich & Bourret, LLC (formerly Dystel & Goderich Lit. Mgmt.)

I never got a confirmation either. Maybe he removed the auto reply. Mine was emailed five weeks ago. I feel your pain LOL

yawn....

I read on query tracker that Jim McCarthy told someone at a conference he was all caught up on queries at the end of March so I think some from February must have gotten overlooked or lost because I sent one then too.

Just FYI. I think it's safe to re-submit at the 8 week mark anyway.

I'm interested in submitting to Miriam Goderich, but QueryTracker's list of clients for her is short. Is there anyone in here who can tell me what sort of fantasy she's interested in? She says she takes some genre and wants more history, which is great because mine's historical fantasy - still, I'd love to be able to make some sort of comparison to one of her clients.

I've queried Miriam twice in a year on two different epic fantasy projects, and had no reply. If you've got historical fantasy, I'd say she's worth the effort. I believe her agency reps Jacqueline Carey.

Yes, I just looked them up and Jane Dystel represents Carey. Though I'd say Carey's Kushiel series is traditional fantasy, there's enough historical flavoring in her books, so that does help. ;D Thanks!

Should requested material be sent as a word doc if not specified?

lloyddoblerrocks said:

Should requested material be sent as a word doc if not specified?

Click to expand...

Yes, always send as a .doc unless they specify another format. Congrats on your request!!!

Thanks, MysteryScribe for the feedback!
I'm pretty excited ...well, really excited, trying to not get over excited, but a little excitement isn't a bad thing, right?
Again, thanks for the response

Another Agency "facilitating" self-publishing (merged into agency's BR&BC thread)

Only they don't want to call it self-publishing; they're using "e-publishing" as a synonym, even though they're not planning to use a commercial e-press to do it.

http://www.dystel.com/2011/06/announcement/

We will charge a 15% commission for our services in helping them project manage everything from choosing a cover artist to working with a copyeditor to uploading their work. We will continue to negotiate all agreements that may ensue as a result of e-publishing, try to place subsidiary rights where applicable, collect monies and review statements to make sure the author is being paid. In short, we will continue to be agents and do the myriad things that agents do.

Click to expand...

If the author is choosing the art, hiring the editor, uploading the book his/her self, then it's self-publishing, plain and simple.

A slightly interesting note for anyone who doesn't know: J.A. Konrath is a Dystel & Goderich client.

As a client, I'm fine with this developement. This e-publishing option is just that - an option. Agents at DGLM will still first and foremost try and place books with publishers. But as we all know, not every book sells.

Also, this doesn't change any vetting that the agent does before signing a client. They will still only take what they love and they are still business-minded, which means traditional publication is the most business viable avenue.

My agent, a former editor for S&S and Penguin, has, with me, put a lot of effort and time into getting my MS ready for submission. Should the worst case scenario happen, I think we'd both like to have my work out there to be ejoyed - and yes - perhaps make a little money.

Or, I could opt to trunk it for a while. The choice is mine, and I like having choices.

It's NOT e-publishing. It's SELF publishing, and that's the problem I see. They're not calling it what it is, which dilutes the actual value of e-publishing for those commercially published with real e-presses.

I'm just thinking out loud here, as I haven't fully digested this news yet, and I haven't figured out how I feel about it (yet).

Is it necessary to put a label on what they are doing? From their announcement, it sounds like they are just "project managing" certain aspects of their clients' self-publishing.

It's still their client self-publishing. They are just providing advice on how to do it effectively.

So, aside from their slightly inaccurate terminology, am I missing something obvious?

Don't get me wrong. I'm dead against agents moving into publishing (when they remain agents). But is this the same thing?

My initial reaction is that it doesn't really bother me. I'd wondered in the past how agents are dealing with this, and wondered if I ever did decide to self-publish if that meant I would lose my agent and be completely on my own. I don't have any intention of pursuing this right now, but I've seen enough other agents mentioning it or having clients choose this route to wonder.

My thought is that they're offering, for the same percentage, to do what I would want someone to help with, and so personally I'd be okay with that. I'm not quite sure I see it as a conflict of interest. To me it sounds more like "we're sticking with our clients and continuing to work with them even if they choose a different career path."

That being said, when my agent gets back from vacation I'll talk to him about it just to get the details. If anything about it sounds iffy to me I'll ask about it and let people know what they say.

dgaughran said:

Don't get me wrong. I'm dead against agents moving into publishing (when they remain agents). But is this the same thing?

Click to expand...

That's exactly how it reads to me. They're doing what a publisher does, helping secure cover art, editing, formatting, etc, for 15%.

But they are not buying the rights. That's the big difference IMO. They are offering to assist some of their existing clients in their self-publishing ventures. Essentially, they are providing self-publishing advice at their standard rate of 15%.

If we can take that statement as is, to me, there is a world of difference between that and an agent becoming a publisher.

The devil may be in the detail, but on the surface, it's radically different to, say, Ed Victor's publishing imprint, or Scott Waxman's Diversion Books.

From what I can tell, they are only offering services to assist their authors who choose to self-publish. They are still taking on work to be submitted to commercial publishers, they are not actually publishing the author's works themselves, and they are not charging a higher fee. If they were suddenly saying "and we'll get fifty percent" then I would see a conflict of interest, or if they were launching an actual publishing imprint, but that's not what they're discussing. It sounds to me like they're saying "New doors are opening up and if our clients are interested we will continue to work with them if they choose to take these new routes for the same rate at which we currently work." I don't have a problem with that.

They aren't taking the rights to the work, as dgaughran said. That's the main difference, IMO.

kaitie said:

From what I can tell, they are only offering services to assist their authors who choose to self-publish. They are still taking on work to be submitted to commercial publishers, they are not actually publishing the author's works themselves, and they are not charging a higher fee. If they were suddenly saying "and we'll get fifty percent" then I would see a conflict of interest, or if they were launching an actual publishing imprint, but that's not what they're discussing. It sounds to me like they're saying "New doors are opening up and if our clients are interested we will continue to work with them if they choose to take these new routes for the same rate at which we currently work." I don't have a problem with that.

They aren't taking the rights to the work, as dgaughran said. That's the main difference, IMO.

Click to expand...

Exactly. And it's even more specific than that. This epub (whatever) option is only for rights that have reverted and manuscripts that can't be sold after an exhausted search for a traditional publishing house. By that time the work is already edited and ready for publication, usually because of the editing work the agent has put into it.

DennyCrane said:

Exactly. And it's even more specific than that. This epub (whatever) option is only for rights that have reverted and manuscripts that can't be sold after an exhausted search for a traditional publishing house. By that time the work is already edited and ready for publication, usually because of the editing work the agent has put into it.

Click to expand...

Yes, but I think Cyia's point (and my problem with it) is what exactly constitutes 'an exhausted search for a traditional publishing house'? That's where the conflict of interest comes in...when an agent expresses an ability and interest in 'helping' a client publish on their own rather, it starts a slippery slope. What's to stop it from becoming a viable alternative to 'saving energy' on a controversial MS or tough sell, rather than exhausting themselves searching for a traditional publisher for it or possibly risking valuable editorial contacts over a MS they're not fully behind? And that's just a for instance.

There's just a certain - something about it that doesn't sit well with me, even if technically it's entirely legit. I'm not sure how to enunciate it properly.

To those who are worried about this, I suggest looking at it from another perspective.

The problem with agents becoming publishers is that their interests will no longer be always aligned with yours. That's where the conflict is. Your worry is that the agent won't advise you impartially any more because they could make more money personally by recommending their publishing arm.

However, in this case, the agent's percentage is identical to what they would receive if they sell your book to a publishing company. So the agent is still strictly motivated, in a financial sense, to get you the best deal they can.

The problem with agent/publisher hybrids is that they get a higher percentage if you go with them. But in this case, because their cut is always 15%, that doesn't arise here.

The agent's interests are still aligned with yours. So there is no conflict.

KalenO said:

Yes, but I think Cyia's point (and my problem with it) is what exactly constitutes 'an exhausted search for a traditional publishing house'? That's where the conflict of interest comes in...when an agent expresses an ability and interest in 'helping' a client publish on their own rather, it starts a slippery slope. What's to stop it from becoming a viable alternative to 'saving energy' on a controversial MS or tough sell, rather than exhausting themselves searching for a traditional publisher for it or possibly risking valuable editorial contacts over a MS they're not fully behind? And that's just a for instance.

There's just a certain - something about it that doesn't sit well with me, even if technically it's entirely legit. I'm not sure how to enunciate it properly.

Click to expand...

I understand what you're saying KalenO, but no agent hammers away on the doors of publishing houses forever, trying to sell a manuscript. Sadly, sometimes they are simply not wanted. At that point, because they have been submitted to publishers, that MS is effectively dead, or doomed to be trunked for a number of years until, presumably, new editors are in place at the publishing houses.

DGLM's service basically says, "Hey, we fought for it. We think the publishing houses are wrong. Let's see what the market thinks. We've got contacts, let's use them."

And as an attorney, I can see no conflict of interest. The percentage is 15% and the enticement of traditional publishers will always be monetarily preferrable to the agent. If anything, such a policy is beneficial to the author, as there will be less chance of being dropped by the agency if the author's work can't be sold.

dgaughran said:

To those who are worried about this, I suggest looking at it from another perspective.

The problem with agents becoming publishers is that their interests will no longer be always aligned with yours. That's where the conflict is. Your worry is that the agent won't advise you impartially any more because they could make more money personally by recommending their publishing arm.

However, in this case, the agent's percentage is identical to what they would receive if they sell your book to a publishing company. So the agent is still strictly motivated, in a financial sense, to get you the best deal they can.

The problem with agent/publisher hybrids is that they get a higher percentage if you go with them. But in this case, because their cut is always 15%, that doesn't arise here.

The agent's interests are still aligned with yours. So there is no conflict.

Click to expand...

This. Good move on agency's part, aside from the using the wrong term per Ciya's point.

DennyCrane said:

I understand what you're saying KalenO, but no agent hammers away on the doors of publishing houses forever, trying to sell a manuscript. Sadly, sometimes they are simply not wanted. At that point, because they have been submitted to publishers, that MS is effectively dead, or doomed to be trunked for a number of years until, presumably, new editors are in place at the publishing houses.

DGLM's service basically says, "Hey, we fought for it. We think the publishing houses are wrong. Let's see what the market thinks. We've got contacts, let's use them."

And as an attorney, I can see no conflict of interest. The percentage is 15% and the enticement of traditional publishers will always be monetarily preferrable to the agent. If anything, such a policy is beneficial to the author, as there will be less chance of being dropped by the agency if the author's work can't be sold.

Click to expand...

All valid points. And please don't get me wrong. I'm not trying to disparage the agency's intentions or anything of the sort. I just think the concept in itself has a great deal of potential for misuse or misinterpretation. I completely get that a whole new direction has opened up for publishing and writers with the rise of self-publishing in digital form. I just think that in the rush to capitalize on it, corners are being cut and precedents are being set that might not be in our best interests in hindsight, a few years down the road.

dgaughran said:

To those who are worried about this, I suggest looking at it from another perspective.

The problem with agents becoming publishers is that their interests will no longer be always aligned with yours. That's where the conflict is. Your worry is that the agent won't advise you impartially any more because they could make more money personally by recommending their publishing arm.

However, in this case, the agent's percentage is identical to what they would receive if they sell your book to a publishing company. So the agent is still strictly motivated, in a financial sense, to get you the best deal they can.

The problem with agent/publisher hybrids is that they get a higher percentage if you go with them. But in this case, because their cut is always 15%, that doesn't arise here.

The agent's interests are still aligned with yours. So there is no conflict.

Click to expand...

What he said. This isn't a situation where I can see them being able to gain from pushing an author toward epublishing. Think of it this way: 15% of an advance is still better than 15% of unknown royalties without the backing of a publisher. It's actually a much bigger risk to go with the self-publishing than it is to find a commercial publisher.

They also aren't taking rights from the book and their rate remains the same no matter how the book is sold. I think the biggest question for an author is more about whether or not they feel the service being provided by the agent would still be worth 15%, which would be a personal decision.