SYW may be the greatest thing since peanut butter and onion sandwiches, but my experience is that critique groups of every size and type destroy at least nine writers for each one the group helps. What are that stats on novels sold by those who have used SYW.
This is the complete opposite of my experience, James.
It's true that writers who blindly follow all the advice given in critique groups might not make the best decisions for their work: but very few writers do that; and in SYW, there are so many different opinions given that our members have to actually think about what might be wrong in their work--and that, alone, is very valuable in a writer's development.
It's been shown, over and over again, that writers who give critiques learn a huge amount about how to improve their own work; and that receiving critiques accelerates writers through the learning process, and makes them improve as writers much more quickly than they would otherwise do. (I think some of this is described in Peter Elbow's widely-known book, Writing With Power, but I might be wrong.)
Why don't you go to SYW and compile those stats for us? It wouldn't take you too long.
As for hiring a line editor or professional "editor" that's absolutely guaranteed failure on a stick. It's the worst possible thing anyone who wants to be a writer can possibly do.
It all depends on how the writer and editor work together.
If the editor imposes changes on the writer, and the writer doesn't question them, then it is not going to become a learning experience for the writer, and so it will help with that one book, but not with further books.
If, however, the editor suggests changes, explains why they're required, and offers alternatives, which is how good editors work, then the writer is going to be given a brilliant lesson in how and why to improve their own work. They can then take what they've learned from that experience and apply it to every single thing they've ever written.
Even if, by some part the Red Sea miracle, the worked on manuscript found favor with an editor, how in blazes are you going to do all the work required getting the manuscript ready for publication when you couldn't even write it for yourself in the first place? The ditor is not going to give you enough time to run back to that hired editor each time he wants something changed, and you couldn't afford it, anyway. If you want to be a writer you MUST be able to do those thing for yourself, or you may as well just put that hired editor in touch with the publishing house editor, and let them do the job without you.
Logic, James. Logic.
If the writer managed to work productively with the first editor, then why would they suddenly be unable to work productively with the second?
And with all the experience you claim to have, as a writer and an editor, then you should know that working with an editor does not equate to having someone else write your book for you; you should know that editors work with their authors, and don't just steam-roller them into making changes they don't understand; you should know that for writers, listening to a skilled editor's advice is one of the quickest ways to improve as a writer that there is.
