[Agency] Objective Entertainment

Not only are they digging deep, but they are not reading the query letters either.

About a year ago, as part of keeping QueryTracker.net up to date, I sent Emails to all the agents on our list inviting them to review and update their profiles.

Last week, Tracey Ravenelle replied to my very OLD email with her same old message that she was "unsure that this premise would work in this tight market" and then went on to encourage me to self-publish.

Since this was not even a query letter, it pretty much proves they are not reading their emails.

I think, if there was ever any doubt that Tracey is benefiting in some way from these referrals, this recent info would probably put that to rest. There is no reason to be doing this digging which I'm sure would take all sorts of effort if there wasn't a payoff involved.

My hunch is that Tracey is just an employee, and that she's following company policy.

- Victoria

victoriastrauss said:

My hunch is that Tracey is just an employee, and that she's following company policy.

- Victoria

Click to expand...

Which just makes it all the more disappointing. There's nothing to justify this kind of a move.

Apart from those nice fat referral fees that we think they might be earning.

After reading that others shared my experience with Objective Entertainment, I felt I had to blog about it: www.lafoster.com.

Same self-publishing junk from Tracey Ravenelle

Seems like this is a form letter being sent around. I sent a query OVER A YEAR AGO and received a response today from Ms. Ravenelle, "Thanks so such for querying us, but we are unsure that this premise would work in this tight market. All said we would encourage you to do what many of our clients have done prior and self- publish with a reputable, and
recommended, publisher...." yada yada yada.

First of all, "Thanks so SUCH for querying us?" The letter "S" isn't even anywhere near the letter "M" on the keyboard. Second, she claims to be able to refer me to two self-publishers who "are not of the ilk that have gotten the better of new authors." Yeah, okay.

Thanks, but no thanks.

LOL! Just today I got the canned form reject a year after I queried Ian. It was from Teresa, asking if she could forward my info to these vanity presses they're associated with. I responded no thanks, i got an agent in May of last year, and I'd never self publish in a million years anyway. I also suggested to her that OE might want to revise their form rejection to omit the insulting suggestion the querier self-publish. With all the flack they've been getting over this, I don't understand why they keep using it. Lazy? Careless? Ignorant? Color me confused.

Hermshark said:

"we would encourage you to do what many of our clients have done prior and self- publish with a reputable, and
recommended, publisher...."

Click to expand...

I doubt this is true.

I am not an attorney, but I know that the New York municipal Department of Consumer Affairs investigates "bait and switch" practices by businesses operating within the city limits.

This is usually focused on retailers advertising some giant bargain and then pushing consumers toward a more expensive option claiming the cheap item "just sold out," but they have also gone after some providers of business services for violating that city ordinance.

If I had gotten one of these letters, I would most certainly send it along to the New York Department of Consumer Affairs just to see what they think of it.

Hi, I'm new to the board. Elizabeth Jote asked to see my ms. I also have it with a couple of other agents. Is there any update on OE's practices? Should I simply write her off as a bad waste of time? I've been reading the thread but wondered if there were any developments. Thanks.

Well a lot of this info in the past few pages is pretty recent. Given the fact that it's not really clear whether this vanity referral stuff is an agency thing or just one person makes them look all the less attractive. Ultimately it is up to you, but all of this would make me too hesitant to want to deal with anyone at this agency.

OE has posted several deals to PM since this rigamarole began, including another recent six-figure, so this new practice doesn't appear to be in any way connected with a change in their ability to sell books. As to the other stuff, it's aimed at people they're rejecting.

Their rejection practice displays a pervasive disregard for writers, in my opinion, suggesting that if one doesn't have a book that sings cha-ching to them, it has no value. To anyone. Ever. Whether that affects their clients is up for dispute.

Originally Posted by M.R.J. Le Blanc
Given the fact that it's not really clear whether this vanity referral stuff is an agency thing or just one person makes them look all the less attractive.

Click to expand...

The company is well aware of Ms. Ravenelle's letters. I discussed them with Elizabeth Jote several times. I think the fact that they continue supports Victoria's hunch that this is company policy.

Plus, all their Google Alerts have been plinking away every time someone posts a new reply to this thread, so...

My rejected e-query sent two years ago also garnered an invitation from Ms. Ravenelle to try AuthorHouse. They must be doing this to make a fat bit for themselves, or why go to the bother of hunting up ancient queries?

Is this the death rattle of a dying agency, or a sign of things to come?

Giant Baby hits the nail on the head. They can and do sell books, and Publishers Marketplace attests to that.

The question of whether they treat rejected queriers with professionalism and respect is another matter.

Thanks for providing this thread and info, and for the personal opinions. It's depressing, but I like having all the info up front instead of getting it in hindsight.

Giant Baby said:

Their rejection practice displays a pervasive disregard for writers, in my opinion, suggesting that if one doesn't have a book that sings cha-ching to them, it has no value. To anyone. Ever. Whether that affects their clients is up for dispute.

Click to expand...

That's what angers me about this policy. A writer who didn't know better might get that letter and think their writing is terrible, because a "respectable" agency says it's not good enough for anything but vanity publishing. It also hints that a writer who uses the vanity publisher and does well could get represented by the agency. Since "does well" and vanity publishing rarely go hand-in-hand, it's misleading at best.

Not to mention, the book in question has already had first publishing rights used up, so it's even less likely the book will find a second home.

DeadlyAccurate said:

That's what angers me about this policy. A writer who didn't know better might get that letter and think their writing is terrible, because a "respectable" agency says it's not good enough for anything but vanity publishing. It also hints that a writer who uses the vanity publisher and does well could get represented by the agency. Since "does well" and vanity publishing rarely go hand-in-hand, it's misleading at best.

Not to mention, the book in question has already had first publishing rights used up, so it's even less likely the book will find a second home.

Click to expand...

It's easy to believe that if one legit agent dislikes a story or it's a genre they aren't partial to that the story is trash, and in a way they're perpetuating that line of thinking. Even though if someone does their research, they'll find a long string of agent interviews that say "You know, I passed on _________ and now it's on the NYT Best Seller list."

This policy could cut the legs out from under decent stories before they get started.

IceCreamEmpress said:

Giant Baby hits the nail on the head. They can and do sell books, and Publishers Marketplace attests to that.

The question of whether they treat rejected queriers with professionalism and respect is another matter.

Click to expand...

That may be so, but then if they're making sales then why the AuthorHouse business? If the theory that the company is profiting financially from the referrals (which I see is the only reason they'd waste the time going through old queries to find referrals) then either they're greedy or somehow in trouble. And neither makes them look very good.

There are few people who are making enough money that they don't want more if they can get it--especially if it's easy.

- Victoria

A friend of mine shared this bait-n-switch reply to her query. She was ROFLHAO. I googled to find this thread. I haven't queried Objective Entertainment myself. Maybe I should just to get that classic email.

M.R.J. Le Blanc said:

If the theory that the company is profiting financially from the referrals (which I see is the only reason they'd waste the time going through old queries to find referrals) then either they're greedy or somehow in trouble. And neither makes them look very good.

Click to expand...

I agree.

And I don't think they're in trouble.

Tracey must be on a blitz campaign. I'd forgotten I'd queried Ian Kleinart months and months ago. It must have been a No Response. Just received the standard form letter posted earlier from Tracey.

Are people writing back to her or just ignoring it?

I ignored it.

So, now I don't feel so bad. Mine was only 10 1/2 months old. LOL. I decided to respond...just to waste some of their time as they wasted mine.

I received Tracy's email today. Personally, six figure deals posted at PM couldn't convince me to sign with these guys now.

It's bad, damaging, and dangerous advice she's sending out, and if they're a legitimate agency they should know better.