Why don't ALL agents accept email queries?

I totally agree with you. Especially now that we have international communications. Penguin books require a full manuscript, double spaced on one side of the paper - sent by mail from Australia to USA. I must have been crazy! Luckily my Canadian publisher demands the query come from the author direct and only by email.

What I've personally found? There's no correlation btwn an agent's comfort level with email and technology and taking snail queries. None. There does, however, appear to be a correlation btwn their taking snail queries and not wanting everyone in the world to just send them a query at the click of a mouse key. And in all honesty, it's not as simple as boom, you're done. Not when they get hundreds and thousands of emailed queries. Even deleting becomes a bit of time suck.

Doesn't mean I didn't wish they all took'em, esp full manuscripts, but eh. I get it. Just query those exclusively online if you prefer. Good luck.

PrincessKitten said:

Mailing queries seems incredibly outdated, unnecessary, and wasteful. Is it some backwards tradition, or is there an actual reason agents require mail?

Click to expand...

Because they want to and its their show

Some don't want to open the floodgates. Agents who take emailed queries get a ton more than those who don't. A ton.

My agent only takes snail mail queries plus a writing sample, but she wanted me to email my full. She communicates with me mostly through email. We go back and forth with revisions electronically as well.

Although her agency has a nice website, sales in my genre were the most important thing to me. Not her internet presence.

ETA: Just to add, snail mail does not equal slow moving. My agent asked for the full 3 days after I sent my query, then offered representation within 2 days after that.

Twizzle said:

There's no correlation btwn an agent's comfort level with email and technology and taking snail queries. None.

Click to expand...

Exactly correct.

I'm surrounded by tech all day long, Use it all day long. I'm good with it. I'm comfortable with it. My head is heavily immersed in the online/tech world for many hours per day. Blogging and dozens of emails daily and producing podcasts and more.

But in my day job as an editor, I tend to prefer snail mail submissions, snail mail resumes, etc. It's how I prefer to work. There are a number of reasons, but ultimately they don't matter. What matters is that it's how I prefer to work. I prefer to read unsolicited submissions that way, for some tasks I prefer to work with paper, and I prefer for unsolicited material to be sent to me that way.

So with that in mind, it doesn't shock me that many agents prefer it, too.

I saw a great example on an agents blog. Someone queried & got rejected then the person wrote back saying what a stupid jerk they were & they should re-consider. There were a few more rude back & forths & the person e-mailed sample pages anyway stating they'd be sorry if they didn't look at it. *sigh*
Made sense. I guess you wouldn't waste their time like that with snail mail.
That being said, I prefer e-mail ones & wear that out before I'll go snail mail. Maybe that's their ploy too...

PrincessKitten said:

I'm puzzled. I look at the calender. Yep, just what I thought. 2009. Wave of the future. Why is it a majority of agents still require queries sent through the mail?

<snip>

Mailing queries seems incredibly outdated, unnecessary, and wasteful. Is it some backwards tradition, or is there an actual reason agents require mail?

Click to expand...

I can't speak for agents, but when I was editing a small press magazine I stopped taking email submissions because people expected a fairly instanteous response to anything done in email. After all, >I< had gotten it within 3 nanoseconds, why couldn't I read it in 3 nanoseconds and get back to them already? Virtually everyone I dealt with expected me to devote 24/7 to reading my email and there were many people (like about 40% of all contributors) would pile up to 20 emails into my box in a work day, asking why I hadn't responded yet.

That got really aggravating really fast.

When I went back to requiring things by snail mail, that expectation of immediacy greatly lessened. The slower pace of it set the tone for the fact that response wasn't going to be immediate, and I didn't get harrassed constantly.

Once I accepted a piece, things went forward in email from that point because it was faster.

So, while it might not be the height of technology, I see it as the height of sanity protection and have no problem with it. Afterall, it's what I did when faced with a much lower volume than what these people have to deal with.

DeleyanLee said:

I can't speak for agents, but when I was editing a small press magazine I stopped taking email submissions because people expected a fairly instanteous response to anything done in email. After all, >I< had gotten it within 3 nanoseconds, why couldn't I read it in 3 nanoseconds and get back to them already?

Click to expand...

For me, even worse are the phone calls that come within an hour of having sent the email. "I just sent you an email, did you get it?" For whatever reason, those phone calls never come with snail mail. Maybe it's because snail mail keeps people at a comfortable distance.

If I tell them I haven't checked, they ask me to check. (How very demanding of you!)

If I tell them I got it, they ask right away, "Are you interested?" Because naturally the first thing I do when I get an email is to drop everything else nd consider that Very Important Email so I can provide an immediate answer.

And those "did you get my email?" phone calls are all too frequent. I get them routinely, and BOY do they ever much with the flow of your work.

At worst, someone might follow up a snail mail submission with an email a few days to a week later. By then, I've usually had an opportunity to consider it and offer an answer with a little more substance than, "Yes, I've gotten your email. Your submission is under consideration."

I go both ways on this..

As another former editor of a small magazine, I preferred snail mail. For me, it's easier to read printed pages and an author's writing was more likely to shine when I read it that way. Add the expense and time of PRINTING scores of long emailed submissions only to find we didn't like them and... ugh.

Also, it was too easy to accidentally lose or miss email queries among the hundreds of messages I got every day....

On the other hand, saving a few trees on the submissions I could instantly tell we'd reject anyway was a good thing.

I am a very techie geeky person too... worked in Silicon Valley producing Web sites during the boom days.

Nowadays, if I were editing again, I would accept only emailed submissions (to save trees, even though they're harder to read properly) -- but authors would receive an auto-reply telling them to just chill and wait a few weeks before calling us. All queries would go to a dedicated email address so I'd be a *little* less likely to lose them.

Hey, I’m a tekie, I do software all day. I live and breathe high tech, working for one of the largest chip designers of the world (Legally require to say “one of the largest chip designers of the world” and not outel). But I hate to read manuals online. I love paper pages. I can concentrate better reading from paper page than a vertical screen. I know a lot of tekies like this. So I understand why an editor or agent wants solid, white, flowing, sexy pages.

There could be many reasons, some of which are mentioned above.

Let me tell you why I would, and formerly did, request snail mail. In the past, both when working as an editor and when I had my own book packaging houses, it was MY comfort zone. I felt, and still do, that I can read and judge far more effectively with paper in hand as opposed to reading an email and such. That's me, but when I was doing the judging, so to speak, that's what I required -- end of story.

Responding to this part:

I realize I should be looking for any agent to represent me, but, before I send my novel out to someone, I have to feel confident about them. They're judging me from a 300 word snippet I give them, so I'll be honest: I'm judging them if their website is old, contains dead links, or isn't updated regularly. Internet presentation and a comfort with email is an absolute must for this day and age. For example, if an agency is technologically lacking, will they be the best candidate to negotiate ebook rights?

Click to expand...

I want my agent (when I get one) to spend their work hours selling books. That's their number one priority. Not maintaining a webpage, which can very easily turn into a time-sucking thing. They do not need to spend time maintaining a webpage to be able to understand ebooks, ebook sales, internet sales, internet presence, email, etc. Similarly, just because I can write an ebook does not mean I have the best means to sell it. The two are not necessarily related. You are making what seems to me to be a false comparison regarding knowledge-- knowing HOW to sell ebooks does not have ANYTHING to do with maintaining a webpage.

As for the comment about "they're judging me on 300 words." Yes. Because you are trying to sell your ability to WRITE. You should judge them on their ability to sell books-- look at their sales record to make your judgement. If they can sell books, that's the agent you want. And they want someone who can write-- someone who can write long and short, but still write well. Espeically since, well, last time I checked this was 2009 and internet presence is an increasing part of marketing. And internet users tend to prefer short snippets of writing. You know, maybe in the 300 word range to get their attention...

Best of luck!

PrincessKitten said:

I'm not asking that an agent reads the entire manuscript on the computer, I'm thinking it would be easier to accept queries--the simple one-page, "Hey, howya doin'? REPRESENT ME!" introduction.

Click to expand...

That's part of the problem. Can you imagine how many more queries they would get from every idiot who thinks he can write a novel? I don't want to deal with 90% of the email in my inbox every day. If I were an agent, I certainly wouldn't want to deal with email after email from people who hadn't bothered to research the industry. At least the requirement that you buy a stamp begins to weed out people who aren't serious or don't understand that publishing is a business.

Gatita said:

Nowadays, if I were editing again, I would accept only emailed submissions (to save trees, even though they're harder to read properly) -- but authors would receive an auto-reply telling them to just chill and wait a few weeks before calling us. All queries would go to a dedicated email address so I'd be a *little* less likely to lose them.

Click to expand...

Yes, trees are generally hard to read.

Having a dedicated email address for queries & an auto-response that says "Yep, I got it--wait 4 weeks before checking up" certainly seem like no-brainers, but there's a huge number of people in publishing who don't do those things.

"Well, people will be more serious if they have to physically send it!" doesn't make the cut--lots of people are perfectly happy to mail out things without bothering to research where they're sending them. After all, that's how they did it for decades before email came along.

PrincessKitten said:

I understand it is easier to read things on paper. I have a printed copy of my story sitting next to me right now waiting to be edited again for those pesky typos I missed squinting at the screen. I'm not asking that an agent reads the entire manuscript on the computer, I'm thinking it would be easier to accept queries--the simple one-page, "Hey, howya doin'? REPRESENT ME!" introduction. (Email queries are also easier on the recent college-graduate's wallet.)

After lurking on writing forums for a while, I've noticed a great many people speak of agents like wandering demi-gods poised with a finger of a big button called "Fate." Yes, they appear to be a necessity in this great writing scheme called Publishing, but, ultimately, *I* am still hiring them. I will be giving them that 15%. Granted, publishing anything is a difficult endeavor, but my attention (and queries) will be drawn to the agents who not only have decent sales, but who took the time to present their agency (and their agency's website) in the best light. I don't think that is so unreasonable.

/rocking the boat

Click to expand...

As a fellow Keystoner -- for international members, the term refers to someone from Pennsylvania, and has nothing to do with drugs -- it's fallen upon my shoulders to regretfully announce the mysterious overnight disappearance of PrincessKitten.

May her hairballs be small, and her tiaras properly bejeweled.

Sycophantly yours,
*name withheld*

PrincessKitten said:

Granted, publishing anything is a difficult endeavor, but my attention (and queries) will be drawn to the agents who not only have decent sales, but who took the time to present their agency (and their agency's website) in the best light. I don't think that is so unreasonable.

/rocking the boat

Click to expand...

But take a look at ICM's website. One page. Boring. Few of their agents have ANY online presence.

Somehow I think they could manage to represent you well.

WendyNYC said:

But take a look at ICM's website. One page. Boring. Few of their agents have ANY online presence.

Somehow I think they could manage to represent you well.

Click to expand...

QFT.

We live in a very media and technology driven society, but those who choose to continue with the same business models and practices which have proven successful for them are not less professional than those who embrace the Internet and all its distractions.

It's also probably worth noting that anyone can put together a slick-looking website. Doesn't mean the agency behind it is solid.

And having seen multiple agents mention getting rude, insulting responses to e-mail rejections, I'm not surprised at all that many agents don't accept e-queries.

I compiled my query list based on what people represented and interviews I could find to get a sense of personality and taste. A couple of them don't even have websites, or just have a one-page site. Seems to be working fine so far.

ICM has all the clients it can handle, and all the queries it can handle as well. It doesn't need to present itself to the public, because everyone they care about knows who they are already. They'd have nothing to gain from taking e-mail queries--after all, it's not their stamps.

blueobsidian said:

That's part of the problem. Can you imagine how many more queries they would get from every idiot who thinks he can write a novel? I don't want to deal with 90% of the email in my inbox every day. If I were an agent, I certainly wouldn't want to deal with email after email from people who hadn't bothered to research the industry. At least the requirement that you buy a stamp begins to weed out people who aren't serious or don't understand that publishing is a business.

Click to expand...

I went to a talk given by a local agent, and she'd said she took email queries for a short time. Her work load quadrupled so she had to stop; she wasn't getting anything done, even with the usual staff of interns and assistants.

PrincessKitten said:

After lurking on writing forums for a while, I've noticed a great many people speak of agents like wandering demi-gods poised with a finger of a big button called "Fate." Yes, they appear to be a necessity in this great writing scheme called Publishing, but, ultimately, *I* am still hiring them. I will be giving them that 15%. Granted, publishing anything is a difficult endeavor, but my attention (and queries) will be drawn to the agents who not only have decent sales, but who took the time to present their agency (and their agency's website) in the best light. I don't think that is so unreasonable.

/rocking the boat

Click to expand...

You've been given very valid reasons why agents don't always accept email submissions or that their websites are maybe not as snazzy as you'd like them to be.

I just want to add on that this attitude in this paragraph makes me a little sad, and is just the reason so many authors fall prey to vanity press scams. Because if there is anything a vanity press scam understands is that the illusion presented through a snazzy website means that more people will consider them legit.

The facts have been presented to you. You may feel free to ignore them in favour of a pretty website, but in doing so you will miss out on some of the top agents out there. Heck my agency is one of the best in the UK and they only accept snail mail submissions. These people understand EVERYTHING about the publishing industry. And that includes ebook rights etc. They are also amazingly supportive and do their jobs brilliantly.

By all means judge them and find them wanting because they won't accept email submissions, but you are only hurting yourself in the process.

Oh and trust me you aren't rocking the boat with this statement of yours. I replied just last week to another poster asking the exact same question. It comes from a genuine sense of confusion which often can be cleared up in one response. However when the person continues to insist that agents who don't do things exactly as they would like them to are bad, I then tend to conclude it comes from a sense of entitlement.

What's more adding that you will be "hiring" an agent, makes me even more wary because working with an agent is a partnership. If you had any experience with agents you would know this, you would understand how amazing such a partnership can be, and you wouldn't look down at agents as mere employees meant to further your greatness.

Also your attitude that the people here treat agents as gods is absurd, and comes from a lack of understanding how important and helpful agents are in the process. They aren't a necessary evil, they are necessary because they make your life as an author so much better. You need to get over that attitude, because until you do, who exactly is going to want to work with you? Creating art is a communal experience, and that's what makes it so exciting. I LOVE getting edits, having someone care enough to help make my book as amazing as possible. It's an amazing high when all the pieces come together like that.

Sorry to be so harsh, but honestly . . . I can't stand logical fallacies - especially false conclusions that some insist are the truth. However this doesn't mean you shouldn't use your own judgment and your own requirements to sub to who you want to, but you will be missing out. And that, unlike your opinions, IS fact.

PrincessKitten,

I was about to respond in greater length and detail, but Toothpaste said it all for me. I'll only add the following.

PrincessKitten said:

*I* am still hiring them. I will be giving them that 15%.

No, you are "giving" them nothing and they are "giving" you nothing. Because what you do, you do well, and because what they know and do, they do well, you have both decided to form a partnership based on an 85/15 percent split, with the agent laying out a lot of time and a lot of the agencies money, all without a guarantee of anything unless they sell your book. On your end you always have the option to terminate your contract at a specified time. In addition, consider that in most cases you need an agent far more than an agent needs you.

Granted, publishing anything is a difficult endeavor, but my attention (and queries) will be drawn to the agents who not only have decent sales, but who took the time to present their agency (and their agency's website) in the best light. I don't think that is so unreasonable.

Agents don't create websites. If anything the agency they work for does so.

/rocking the boat

Click to expand...

PrincessKitten:
They're judging me from a 300 word snippet I give them, so I'll be honest: I'm judging them if their website is old, contains dead links, or isn't updated regularly. Internet presentation and a comfort with email is an absolute must for this day and age.

Click to expand...

I agree with you that it's frustrating when you go to an agent's website and their guidelines haven't been updated or there's no information on existing clients (who you already know they have) so you can get a feel for the kind of work they're interested in.

However, many agents do have telephone numbers up on their site and sometimes it's possible to give them a call and see who to send a particular query to if you want to scout them out before hand (note though that while some agents seem to welcome this, for others it's a no-no, so it's worth checking out in advance).

For me though, the ultimate guide as to whether I'm going to submit to an agent is not the quality of their website but the quality of their sales. If Publisher's Marketplace tells me that an agent has landed a number of very nice deals for new authors in the last couple of years, then that's who I'm going to target because they've got a track record of delivering the goods, which is what you want if they're going to take you on.

PrincessKitten:
Is it some backwards tradition, or is there an actual reason agents require mail?

Click to expand...

For some it's a cost-saving measure - it makes no sense for them to spend money printing work out if they can get authors to print it out and send it in for them.

PrincessKitten: (BOLDING MINE)
I'm not asking that an agent reads the entire manuscript on the computer, I'm thinking it would be easier to accept queries--the simple one-page, "Hey, howya doin'? REPRESENT ME!" introduction. (Email queries are also easier on the recent college-graduate's wallet.)

Click to expand...

Like I said, unfortunately they're not a charity.

If it's a cost issue for you, then research those agents who rep the kind of work you're doing and do take email submissions first. If you score with one of them, you won't need to keep doing the printing thing.

PrincessKitten:
Yes, they appear to be a necessity in this great writing scheme called Publishing, but, ultimately, *I* am still hiring them. I will be giving them that 15%.

Click to expand...

No, you're not hiring them. You don't pay them anything up front. They only get paid if they can sell your manuscript, therefore they earn that 15% because they will most likely have:

(a) worked with you to polish and tighten your manuscript until it's at a point where it can go out into the publishing market;

(b) matched your manuscript to an editor who is willing to pay for it;

(c) negotiated the contract with that editor to ensure that you get the best deal possible;

(d) acted as point-man between you and your manuscript as the editing process rumbles along;

(e) acted as point-man between you and the publisher when it comes to working out the cover and the marketing and publicity plan;

(f) will be chasing your publisher for royalty payments once the book is published and selling (hopefully) lots of copies.

A good agent will have earned every penny of that 15% commission and I'll also point out that that 15% is likely to be on a comparatively small advance if you're a first time author (i.e. if you get the standard UK advance of £4000 and don't earn out to start receiving royalties, then the agent only gets £600 for hours and hours of work). There are very few professions out there that would give you all those services for such a small amount of cash, which is all the more reason why a good agent should be treasured, nurtured to your bosom and treated like a proverbial squishie.

MM