Agency reading fees (good or bad?)

Greetings from San Diego, where I'm trying to overcome the time difference as quickly as possible so that I don't keep passing out at 9 pm.

In reading these posts, I can't help but notice the number of times authors say "it only takes a few minutes to...". I wish I could add up all those "few minutes." They'd probably represent several weeks of the year.

As for the suggestions that are recommended, using myself as an example:

• I have strict submission guidelines posted on my website.
• I search the internet two to three times a year and contact those sites listing my name and address and ask them to remove the mailing address and just list a link to my site and submission guidelines.
• I have taken my phone number off my site.
• In every place that I can, such as in the LITERARY MARKETPLACE and Jeff Herman's book, I say "Please visit my website for complete submission guidelines."
• I insist on a query only; no sample chapters unless requested.

And yet, I still get plenty of unsolicited sample chapters or manuscripts. Do I have a system for checking what I've requested and have not? Yes. But how much time do I waste checking, then printing out the letter that says "This material was not requested. Please visit my website for our query guidelines"? And I do still get phone calls following up. And even though I post on my site that authors should not follow up, they still do, sometimes with quite an attitude.

Now, I don't want to sound like a Scrooge, but the reality is that many authors don't read, don't listen, or don't care. And they are making it harder for those that do to get their material read, I think.

Additionally, I was surprised to see a comment above regarding reading fees being imposed to "keep agents afloat." This discussion was about whether or not such fees would improve turnaround times, reduce author grumbling about the long waits, and generally result in an improved process. Maybe the AAR should allow reading fees, provided that the income from such reading fees is used solely to speed the process of reading and responding to agents and that no SASE is required if an agent requires a reading fee and provided that agents agree to provide project-specific responses to each submission. Perhaps that would alleviate some of the concerns regarding agencies becoming paper mills that simply take in submissions with fees and churn out rejections.

The post talking about smaller publishers who don't charge fees getting all the good books and then larger publishers getting rid of fees seemed a bit bass-akwards to me. I think what's more likely to happen is that smaller publishers might not charge a fee, find some good books, become bigger pubishers, find themselves overwhelmed by submissions, then start charging a fee.

As for certification, this might be a more interesting thread and perhaps someone should start it. Should agents be certified? What would such a certification involve? What are the qualifications for being an agent?

As for the "fee" line of discussion, I agree with the writer who says this might be played out.

Best,
Andy

Andy,

Happy vacation. But since you're on line for the moment, I wonder if you'd be able to check out my recent post in the Bewares section called Is This How It's Done These Days. It's about an agent recommending that I use the services of an editor and then just happening to have the name of a good one on hand.

See, Andy, you are much more generous than I would be. Unsolicted paper would go back, unread, without a letter, or just into the round can, unopened. "It only takes a few minutes" to read the freakin' guidelines!

Nothing irritates me more than authors who think the rules don't apply to them. They only don't apply when the agent/editor says they don't. We send out seven or eight queries or packages at at time - easy to track with a spreadsheet, or even simple pad and paper. Agents recieve hundreds.

I guess I'm in the minority. Writers need to accept responsiblity, and accept that this is a slow business, from one end to the other. Impatience is one of the reasons PA keeps sucking people in.

Andrew Zack said:

In reading these posts, I can't help but notice the number of times authors say "it only takes a few minutes to...". I wish I could add up all those "few minutes." They'd probably represent several weeks of the year.

Click to expand...

I know exactly what you mean. When I was a retailer, every manufacturer wanted me to "just do this" for them or their products, applying the same reasoning. If I had done all they asked, I'd still be doing it, and I sold the store a year ago.

Additionally, I was surprised to see a comment above regarding reading fees being imposed to "keep agents afloat." This discussion was about whether or not such fees would improve turnaround times, reduce author grumbling about the long waits, and generally result in an improved process.

Click to expand...

Yes, but that was a response to:

By the way, the argument that writers are poor and therefore should be the last ones to pay doesn't quite fly for me. If I want to paint, but can't afford paint, should I not have to pay? If I want to be a carpenter, but can't afford a hammer, should the builder pay for my tools?

Click to expand...

...which is firmly about money.

Andrew Zack said:

Greetings from San Diego, where I'm trying to overcome the time difference as quickly as possible so that I don't keep passing out at 9 pm.

Click to expand...

Good luck! Sincerely! I know what it is to have to deal with a screwed up sleep schedule. It's not fun.

In reading these posts, I can't help but notice the number of times authors say "it only takes a few minutes to...". I wish I could add up all those "few minutes." They'd probably represent several weeks of the year.

Click to expand...

I think that's from not knowing how it is for you. It's just like you not knowing how it is for writers. When you say, "It just takes a few bucks for a reading fee..." Same thing, different side.

As for the suggestions that are recommended, using myself as an example: ... And yet, I still get plenty of unsolicited sample chapters or manuscripts. Do I have a system for checking what I've requested and have not? Yes. But how much time do I waste checking, then printing out the letter that says "This material was not requested. Please visit my website for our query guidelines"?

Click to expand...

Again, require all writers to write "Requested Material" on the outside of their package. Remind them when you request it. Print up a bunch of letters ahead of time that say that so all you have to do is put it in the SASE and drop it in the mail. Don't worry about someone getting mad about that. They can get glad in the same britches they got mad in, now can't they?

And I do still get phone calls following up. And even though I post on my site that authors should not follow up, they still do, sometimes with quite an attitude.

Click to expand...

Then cross them off your list. Or rather, add them to a list of writers never to work with. Again, they just helped you avoid a sticky working situation by showing their true colors well ahead of time. Saved you the trouble of working with a prima donna, huh? Better now than in the middle of contract negotiations with a publisher imho.


It's admirable that you want to try to work with people like this and atleast be polite back, but really, Andy, life's too short. Cut out most of your politeness but leave in all of the civility, and go on from there. Out of all those submissions you get, there's bound to be plenty who can write and are polite and patient. Those things aren't mutually exclusive. Pick the good ones and throw the rest back. Taking a few knocks like that just might make the rude ones wise up and start being more polite to their next agent prospect. If not, then again, they can just go unagented. Period.

Now, I don't want to sound like a Scrooge, but the reality is that many authors don't read, don't listen, or don't care. And they are making it harder for those that do to get their material read, I think.

Click to expand...

I think so, too. I think you hit the nail right on the head there.


Please don't make it still harder on those of us who do read, do listen and do care. Please. Why should those of us who can do those things be punished for the ones that can't? Punish the ones that can't read, don't listen and don't care by spending less time and effort on responding to them. Spend that time and effort on those of us who are polite and patient. Please.

This discussion was about whether or not such fees would improve turnaround times, reduce author grumbling about the long waits, and generally result in an improved process. ... Perhaps that would alleviate some of the concerns regarding agencies becoming paper mills that simply take in submissions with fees and churn out rejections.

Click to expand...

I don't agree with this. The main reason I don't is because you are an agent, not an editor or critiquer (sp?) or reviewer. It's not your job to give every writer feedback. If you quit trying to do this and/or quit being worried about it, then maybe the turnaround time "problem" would be solved. If it's not, then writers just need to be more patient. Period.

Don't worry about the ones that are rude and impatient. If they're serious about writing, they'll eventually figure it out either on their own or when they find their way to an online writer's group like this one, where the seasoned vets will tell them to lose the 'tude.

Again, it's admirable that you are concerned about this, but you surely don't need to be, atleast not to this magnitude. People will complain. That's life. Even if you miraculously found some way to give instant response with a line by line critique, people will still complain. That's a fact. You'll never be able to change that, so if I were you I'd simply change my way of thinking about it, resolving to do the best I can and not worry about it so much. Again, it's awful nice to hear that agents are concerned about writers' feelings, but many of us don't really need that much coddling.

The post talking about smaller publishers who don't charge fees getting all the good books and then larger publishers getting rid of fees seemed a bit bass-akwards to me. I think what's more likely to happen is that smaller publishers might not charge a fee, find some good books, become bigger pubishers, find themselves overwhelmed by submissions, then start charging a fee.

Click to expand...

No, publishers don't charge a fee in that scenario. Agents do. Also, I didn't say smaller publishers who don't charge fees would get all the good books. I said that smaller publishers who don't require agented submissions will get the lion's share of the good books. Then larger publishers would probably take note and start accepting unagented submissioins.

Furthermore, I don't think that smaller publishers who found themselves in "the big time" would change anything and start requiring agented submissions. I'd like to think most of them atleast would be smarter than that and realize that would be shooting themselves in the foot. Just because some writers have the ability to pay doesn't mean they're any better at writing.

As for certification, this might be a more interesting thread and perhaps someone should start it. Should agents be certified? What would such a certification involve? What are the qualifications for being an agent?

Click to expand...

I don't think certifying agents would be any better than the system we have now. All that would do is make things more expensive for all involved and probably screw everything up as usually happens when you get the government involved.


Like Christine, I think it'd just be better for writers to educate themselves, be more patient and learn a little politeness. Period. I definitely agree with absolutely everyting she said. "It only takes a few minutes to read the freakin' guidelines" and "Writers need to accept responsiblity, and accept that this is a slow business, from one end to the other." PERFECT!

I've also never understood the writers who send the sample chapters without the agent requesting them.

I know the idea, oh oh if they read my sample chapters they will want to read the rest---writers need to understand that an agent really doesn't want to work with someone who can't follow the rules to start with.

Cost wise--much cheaper to send only the query--

Shawn (who when searching for an agent listed them by not needing sample chapters first--well, after the other or with the other list of wants or don't wants I had)

There are sites out there that suggest that it is a good idea to enclose the first 5 pages with a query. Agentqery.com say this and, I believe, Miss Snark endorses this

Really, Waylander? I was under the impression that in the absence of any specific guideline instructions it was better to simply put in a query letter and a one page synopsis. Is this not correct? Anybody want to chime in?

I have done this recently and it resulted in a full manuscript request.

I may be mistaken about it being Agentquery's advice. I just looked at the advice on the site and couldn't find it. It may have been in a previous version.

I would rather put in a sample of the writing than a one page synopsis (and not just because my synopsis is 3 pages) as very few people produce a good synopsis, but you can often tell a lot about the quality of their writing from just a few pages.

Some agencies don't have specific guidelines. Most say "query ONLY" or "we prefer query and synopsis ONLY" (which means only send those!)

Don't care who endorses what, do what the damn guidlines say!

Yes, and putting in pages may give a sample of the writing style, but synopsis tells whether or not your story falls apart in the middle or at the end. Also important.

I'd like to chime in on the "what do agents want" question and offer this: Ignore the LITERARY MARKETPLACE. For some reason, many librarians seem to send authors to the LMP as a resource. However, the LMP allows little room for the listing and edits it. Further, the LMP is a trade resource, not a resource for authors, unless of course the author wants to self-publish and needs to find a printer. Seriously. I'm not even sure why agents are in there, other than because it beefs up the number of pages. I last ordered the LMP in 2003 and just chucked it when I realized I haven't looked at in two years.

I also do not recommend any of the Writer's Digest resources. I found myself listed in one of their books and didn't understand how that happened. I knew I hadn't listed myself. I found they had gone to my website and copied information. However, they copied it, then edited it down. Thus it was incomplete. I wrote them a letter and insisted they remove me from future editions, which they did.

I have found many a site that reproduces the membership lists of the AAR. Why, I'm not sure. The AAR website is quite available. It is also somewhat plastic, with new agents joining and some agents quitting each year, so the AAR's site is its own best resource, not one that reproduces it.

Then there are those sites the reproduce the information they received when they contacted agencies, often for the purpose of embarrassing (IMHO) the agent. I suppose there's a benefit for a potential author to seeing how a busy agent might be tripped up, but I prefer not to reward such behavior and do not frequent such sites.

You should check the individual sites of the agents involved. If you cannot find such a site, then check out Jeff Herman's book. Of all of the resources I've seen, that seems the best to me because the agents themselves write the entries and I'm not aware of any editing that goes on. Of course, this means the entries are tremendously subjective, but they do have the advantage of allowing the agent to be very, very specific about what they want.

On the comment above regarding sending a query and synopsis, I want to say that the query should include the synopsis. If you haven't read my article/chapter on the perfect pitch on my website, you should. The link is http://www.zackcompany.com/submissions/perfectpitch.pdf, and since this is a PDF, you will need Adobe Reader to view it. You can download version 7 of Adobe Reader for free from here: http://www.adobe.com/products/acrobat/readstep2.html. This article also appeared as a chapter in a book called MAKING THE PERFECT PITCH, by Katherine Sands, wherein you can read many an agent's thoughts on writing the perfect query.

Best wishes,
Andy

I have done this recently and it resulted in a full manuscript request.

Click to expand...

That's all well and good, Waylander, but from what I've read, that course of action misses way more than it hits. Isn't that kind of like PublishAmerica saying that one of their authors got a movie deal ~ one out of what, sixteen thousand? Sure, it's possible, but is it really probable?

I would rather put in a sample of the writing than a one page synopsis (and not just because my synopsis is 3 pages) as very few people produce a good synopsis, but you can often tell a lot about the quality of their writing from just a few pages.

Click to expand...

Sorry again, but I just can't agree with this. If your synopsis is three pages and they want one, then cut it down to one. I may be a newbie, but common sense tells me that if you think you can't, think again ~ it just takes learning, something I'm working on now, well before I need that skill. Again, common sense tells me I'm right, but I'm not perfect and surely will apologize if I'm wrong.

No offense, Waylander. Honestly and sincerely I mean no offense, but I think you might be the kind of writer that gives agents like Andy fits, which in turn makes it hard on all the rest of us. It sounds like you are saying that a publication or single agent knows better what an agent wants than the agent himself. That doesn't compute.

Like Christine said, "Don't care who endorses what, do what the damn guidlines say!" Couldn't have said it any better myself. That's the agent himself telling you exactly what they want. I don't think they care what others want, and I'd bet the ranch they don't much care what others think the agent wants. They just want it done their way. Period. Full stop. Is that so bad? I don't think so. Even though it might seem silly to you or me, that's irrelevant. There's probably a good reason for it, so just do it. IMHO, the only time there should be any wiggle room on that is when the guidelines don't specify. In that case, it'd be kind of silly to send a query to ask how they want you to send a query. But if guidelines are there, they're there for a reason.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Yeah, Andy! What Spookywriter said! Is your jetlag any better yet?

Thanks for the link, Andy. I did get some good tips from it. But I do have a question (that can wait 'til after Christmas atleast! ). Above, you said...

...I want to say that the query should include the synopsis.

Click to expand...

Do you mean that the synopsis and query letter should be one document? IE write the synopsis into the query letter itself? That's the way I read that anyway. That confuses me because at your link, you talk about query letters and say...

It gives me a short and concise description of the book that doesn't give the entire story away, but intrigues me.

Click to expand...

But a synopsis does give the story away. It ensures the agent/publisher that the story has a beginning, middle and end and, like Christine said, that the story doesn't fall apart along the way.

It does sound like what I've learned so far that a query letter should be is exactly what you're saying at your link. But what you say a query letter should be doesn't include a synopsis.

No offense, Waylander. Honestly and sincerely I mean no offense, but I think you might be the kind of writer that gives agents like Andy fits, which in turn makes it hard on all the rest of us. It sounds like you are saying that a publication or single agent knows better what an agent wants than the agent himself. That doesn't compute.




Perhaps it would be appropriate for me to go into a little more detail about my decision process on agent queries, then you may decide whether or not I'm one of those writers that give agents fits.
I start by consulting online market guides such as Agent query.com to see if the agent handles my genre, and also searching sites such as this to see what else is known about them.
If the agency has a website then I automatically consult that to see if the online guide has it correct, and what their submission criteria are.
Some agents, Mr Zack being a fine example, have well put-together and informative websites that lay out precisely what he wants to receive. In such cases I send them exactly what they specify.
Other agencies' sites are less informative. Some have merely a statement of 'send a query to the following address' . Some agencies do not have websites and there may be contradictory statements about what to send them. These are the occasions when I will send a query letter (which contains a one paragraph synopsis of the story) with the first 5 pages.
How does this sound Ms Colter?
Still think I'm making it hard for other writers?

Well, yes, that's what I said, Waylander. Some are specific, some are not. But, that's not what YOU said originally. You said that some place or other endorsed sending pages with query. Which is crap. If they don't ask for pages, don't send them. If they say, 'send a query to this address', you send a query - only. I don't think you can ever go wrong with just sending a query, even if you find contradictory information.

Of course, I understand that part of a query is telling what your story is about - or else why bother? Exactly what Andy said - enough to give the agent a taste (and let them know that it's actually something they rep). A full synopsis should give the whole story. Pages are pages.

You just didn't make it clear with your other post. You made it sound like you bucked the agent's guidelines because Agentquery said to. Which is what I was responding to.

Personally, for me, I always just send a query letter. I've seen a couple agent sites that state to send the first three chapters along with the query, but I have this nagging fear about that not being a good idea. Normally, the first 3 chapters in any of my manuscripts equates to about 35-40 pages. That's dangerously close to a partial submission, if you ask me. So, I send them out a query letter and hope for the best. Sometimes it ends with requests for partials (and in one lucky instance, a request for a full) and sometimes it ends with a big fat "sorry Charlie." Either way, I like to err on the side of caution.

My $.02 for anyone who might care to listen.

Yet again, I agree with Christine. I even went back and reread your comments and that's sure what it sounded like ~ that you were advocating sending pages no matter what the guidelines said.

You just didn't make it clear with your other post. You made it sound like you bucked the agent's guidelines because Agentquery said to. Which is what I was responding to.

Click to expand...

That's what I was responding to as well.

Merry Xmas, all. And Happy Hanukkah to all those folks stuck on the East Coast.

In answer to the question, the query should include a brief synopsis as a part of the query letter. The query is supposed to "hook" an agent. But when they ask for a chapter and synopsis, that synopsis should be the full story.

Best,
Andy

And what you do, 'Babe, is not going to cause you any problems either. I think agents only really get mad when people send stuff not asked for, not when they send less.

Like I said, I don't think you can go wrong with sending just a query. But then, I'm not an agent, so maybe Andy can weigh in on this.

First of all, happy holidays to everyone reading this, and to all your friends and families.

So.

Andrew Zack said:

Additionally, I was surprised to see a comment above regarding reading fees being imposed to "keep agents afloat." This discussion was about whether or not such fees would improve turnaround times, reduce author grumbling about the long waits, and generally result in an improved process.

Click to expand...

It's the undercurrent to this entire discussion. Should agents pay their bills with money they earn from people they don't represent? It seems to me that reading fees would be a cash cow, especially for an agent that is only moderately successful.

Andrew Zack said:

Maybe the AAR should allow reading fees, provided that the income from such reading fees is used solely to speed the process of reading and responding to agents and that no SASE is required if an agent requires a reading fee and provided that agents agree to provide project-specific responses to each submission. Perhaps that would alleviate some of the concerns regarding agencies becoming paper mills that simply take in submissions with fees and churn out rejections.

Click to expand...

How is the AAR going to check this? Are agents supposed to keep a separate set of books? If the AAR does allow this change, how do we know you won't be back in a year playing devil's advocate for the position that those reading fee rules are too burdensome and ought to be thrown away?

Frankly, I don't see any reason to believe you're arguing in favor of these to create a "generally improved process." For instance:

(best read out loud in a very self-righteous tone) “We, the authors of the world, believe that agents and publishers should do business the way we say they should, dammit, and if you don’t, we will label you a bad agent, or worse a scammer, or a bad publisher, and we will rise up and scream (or more likely post or blog) in our many voices until you do business the way we want you to do business.”

ZZZZzzzzzzzz. Oh, sorry, I dozed off while the authors were ranting.

This, folks, reminds me of my female friends who like to rant and rave about what jerks men are and why don’t men treat women the way women want to be treated. Well, some men will, but that’s mostly to get la--, I mean lucky, but at the end of the day, it seems most women still feel like they’ve just been screwed.

Of course, then there’s the men, complaining that women are such pains in the *** and that their expectations are so high and how the hell did their expectations get so high and, what, do they think all men are made out of money?

Click to expand...

So, why should we ignore the question of using reading fees to keep an agent afloat? Maybe everything you've been saying here is just what you need to say to get laid.

Here, you act as though you're having a reasoned, academic discussion about some policy change that the AAR might want to consider someday. On your own space, you doze off while the authors are ranting. Here, you say that others have raised interesting points. There, you say authors are screaming to force you to do business that way they want you to do business.

Pardon me if I find your tone here disingenuous, considering.

And to address your comment upthread, here at casa del HConn all our income is on commission. As lifestyles go, it's not for everyone.

Miss Snark, who has been tauted in the other boards, says to send 2-5 pages with the query and/or synop...whether or not they ask for it. So yes, there are sites that do advise the practice.


David

And while I usually do follow Miss Snark's advice, I take the word of other agents and published authors when it comes to this. People write their guidelines for a reason. If you don't follow them, the first thing that agent is going to know about you is that you can't or won't follow directions.

Unless, of course, there are no guidelines, or they are ambiguous. But they should be listed somewhere.

Vacation. Right. I've heard of those.

Seasons Greetings to you and yours, Andy.

A quick follow-on to the "read the guidelines" discussion. My agent employs others. Each of them have their own list of clients, and each client has a list of concurrent projects, many of which are are already making money for both parties.

The last thing one of those agents need is another "Guidelines-immune fopdoodle demanding to be discovered." It's kind of funny when you talk to a group of aspiring writers and they tell all these stories of how they managed to circumvent the dread submission process. It's also interesting to note that among all these folk whom I've encountered, none have actually landed a contract. Not to say it hasn't happened, or won't at some future time. It IS to say such tactics actually narrow the windows of opportunity , rather than expand them.

How many times have we read comments from editors, publishers, and agents that begin, "You won't believe how difficult it is to find a writer who will take the time to adhere to the sub guidelines." Something tells me if the process wasn't that important, so many in the biz wouldn't be bemoaning the issue.

Why start out with a strike against you when by simply following the guidelines, you've enhanced your chances?

Now, on to the discussion of reading fees.
In a society built and maintained around the $, I suppose it's a natural inclination of some agents to require a reading fee or at least consider doing so. They have that right.

I, on the other hand, also have the right to avoid them like the plague. I don't mind paying for a "service." (We may loosely define service as "an act of some monetary value to me, the consumer.) Reading my manuscript is not a service. It's an invitation to do fair and equitable business.

A reading fee is akin to my plumber charging me for considering to re-pipe my kitchen. He will have some time invested in looking at the job, estimating time and materials, but that act of analysis is of no direct benefit to me, thus, I'm not paying him a dime. I will, however, pay him once he accepts me as a client, and completes his obligation.

A reading fee is akin to my plumber charging me for considering to re-pipe my kitchen. He will have some time invested in looking at the job, estimating time and materials, but that act of analysis is of no direct benefit to me, thus, I'm not paying him a dime. I will, however, pay him once he accepts me as a client, and completes his obligation.

Click to expand...

Ahhh, but there are many places that do charge to look at a job. Many car body shops charge a fee just look at your car and tell you how much it will cost to repair that fender bender. I checked with several electricians around here to see if I could find one to come out and tell me how much a yard light and an additional outdoor breaker box would cost to put in--all of them wanted a fee to just drive out and look at the job.

I can see both sides of the debate (And just a reminder, Andy is not arguing for himself but simply playing devil's advocate on the fee side) and I can see abuse on both sides of it.

The solutions I think are to do your research, that will cut down on the number of "wrong" subs and agent recieves. Get over the idea that you are so great a writer that you don't need to follow the rules---

Shawn