What word count method do agents prefer?

Some agents, on their websites, state which count they prefer, but most don't. Nowadays, I think most people us the Word feature to calculate word count. I always did. And unless your count is either extremely high or too low, the difference of a few thousand words (Word vs. 250) won't make a lot of difference to agents.

The difference between using the MSWord count and the standard pages X 250 count is huge, not just a few thousand words.

I've given up on estimating the count. I use the computer word count function. It's exact. If agents or publishers insist on using an archaic method that's inaccurate, they might want to consider retiring.

fullbookjacket said:

The difference between using the MSWord count and the standard pages X 250 count is huge, not just a few thousand words.

Click to expand...

The few times I've experimented with it, the word counts end up within a couple thousand of each other. YMMV.

ChaosTitan said:

The few times I've experimented with it, the word counts end up within a couple thousand of each other. YMMV.

Click to expand...

I think this also depends on what word processor you're using. For instance, Microsoft Works will generally give a different word count than will WordPad or OpenOffice.org.

Also, when I've counted words using the 250 method on a novel manuscript, and compared it to the word counting feature on my word processor, the difference is rather large, definitely more than a couple thousand words.

For example, when I was writing one of my later versions of Promised World a couple years back, my manuscript using the 250 method was a little over 90,000 words, whereas with the word processor, it came out to just under 70,000 words. That was one of the major discouragements I had over the years with that manuscript, because my old PA book, using the word processor's counting method, came in at over 93,000 words. That manuscript was 383 pages long, but they were all Times New Roman with single-spacing between each line.

So from what I've seen, the 250 method could be considered very unreliable if you're looking at it from an actual word-count standpoint.

But like a few of our old-time posters used to say, most houses are looking for a rough estimate so they can figure out how much paper they're going to be using in each volume of a book. One of those people insisted that the 250 method was superior depending on what exactly a house is looking for in the word counting method you use.

Oh, and while I'm thinking about it, there was another, possibly more reliable method I learned in High School. I've seen a couple companies (Baen, for one) mention this method, though I've never seen a name for it.

The method goes like this:

1. Count all the words in ten lines of one page.
2. Divide the total words in those ten lines, by ten.
3. Multiply the resulting dividend by the average amount of lines in your pages.
4. Take the resulting number, and multiply it by your total number of pages. This will give you your approximate word count.


It's a hard method to remember. Had I not been instructed on a personal level how to use it, I would never have retained it. But I think it comes somewhat closer to your real word count than the 250 method does, especially if you're using a smaller point size (or pitch on a typewriter) or have more lines per page than the 250 method's required 25.

If an agent doesn't specify, I'd round it to the nearest hundred. As in 80,500 words. I used the tools > word count feature in Word, but manually a double spaced page is about 250 words, I believe. When sending off manuscripts, I used Times New Roman unless they specified. Courier is also accepted but it takes up more space and more pages and is heavier to mail. This worked for me, hope it helps.

I don't know a single author who has been punished for using Times New Roman and the word count feature on Microsoft Word. It's times like these I am so happy I didn't know these kinds of forums existed when I was first shopping my MS. I assumed that the word count feature was acceptable. In fact I assumed a good many things that otherwise can be debated for pages and pages on forums. Stood me in good stead.

It's about being reasonable, not panicking. I know this thread will continue long after my post, but still: the word count feature in Microsoft word is fine. Round it to the nearest thousand.

I use Apple's Pages. Am I safe in assuming that its word count feature gives the same results as Word?

Barb D said:

I use Apple's Pages. Am I safe in assuming that its word count feature gives the same results as Word?

Click to expand...

I would assume so, unless one of them can't count.

tomothecat said:

I would assume so, unless one of them can't count.

Click to expand...

Again, that depends on the word processor. Some word processors count a hyphenated word as one word; others count it as two. I've had differing word counts on the same document, from word processors made by the same company.

Not to sound like you ought not to use your word processor's word counting feature; I'm just saying that depending upon what your word processing program considers one word, you might very well get a different count.

In the end, what really matters is what your agent or editor wants you to do. If they plainly tell you, "Use the 250 method," then use the 250 method. If they plainly tell you, "Use the word processor's counting feature," use the word processor's counting feature. If they don't say jack about it, don't worry about it.