Published; now switching agents. Will agents look upon me poorly?

I was in a similar place a few years ago--left my agent of ten years and four books sold to two publishers, for reasons. It took 20 months or so, but I signed with a new agent with a new book. Twenty months felt like a long time, but I think it is harder these days to sign with an agent that it was the first time I did this. I don't think my previously having been agented was a negative factor; it might have been if I'd, say, bounced agent #1 after six months or something. But agents understand that authors and their needs can change over time. If anything, having published books and being previously agented over a long term should be a positive when querying afresh--it proves you're a professional.

Good luck. I know where you are, and it's hard.

Been there twice, gotten new agents twice. (1st time, mutual break. 2nd time, agent culled their list due to personal reasons -- while I was on submission) Basically you just need to be upfront with the agents you query and if they ask what happened, then tell them.

Since you are querying with a manuscript that has not been shopped yet, the thought that ran through my head is that there is no real reason to mention your old agent until a new one has offered rep. You can discuss it with them at that time, and you don't have to go into very much detail, just that you've decided to look for a new agent due to different tastes. If you were trying to sell one of the manuscripts that your agent already shopped, then I'd think it would be more important to let them know before they fell in love with it.

D.L. Shepherd said:

Since you are querying with a manuscript that has not been shopped yet, the thought that ran through my head is that there is no real reason to mention your old agent until a new one has offered rep.

Click to expand...

Although this is true in principle (IMO), in practice an interested agent is going to google you. They'll likely be able to tell if your previous publications went through an agent.

I honestly don't know if it's better to include a line like "I have parted amicably with my previous representation" in the query or not.

D.L. Shepherd said:

Since you are querying with a manuscript that has not been shopped yet, the thought that ran through my head is that there is no real reason to mention your old agent until a new one has offered rep. You can discuss it with them at that time, and you don't have to go into very much detail, just that you've decided to look for a new agent due to different tastes. If you were trying to sell one of the manuscripts that your agent already shopped, then I'd think it would be more important to let them know before they fell in love with it.

Click to expand...

This. If it's a fresh one, like you said, you really don't have to mention your history with other agents. Not until they start showing an interest in your work, is when I'd start bringing it up. Having it in every query might be a deterrence to some agents. Maybe it's too honest to tell all that, ya know? Sometimes too much is too much.

And don't give up. As I've tweeted about, it's hard to write a book, it's even harder to get it published, and it's the hardest to maintain a writing career. Basically sums up everything. I worry about my future works all the time because I've been dropped by publishers before. Then it's back to looking for an agent? or another publisher? or what. Just know, you're not alone. I write YA too and it's horribly competitive.

I've also been through this. My first agent didn't like my second book, and after many years of me reworking book 2 (massive overhauls - over and over and over again) to please her, she still didn't like it. It took me a long time to realise I wanted my writing to go in a direction which didn't resonate with her.

After an amicable split, I began querying again. And, well, this time round it was MUCH tougher out there. There's a lot more competition, and a lot of really polished, strong manuscripts out there desperately seeking representation. The agents are over-subscribed, and RaggyCat, yes, I think YA is even harder than the genre I was writing in. So I suggest you keep going, I'm hearing about people querying up to 350 agents before they find representation. The reality is that it's just a lot harder out there now.

I did let agents know that I was previously represented and that we did split amicably - and that the manuscript has not been shopped to any editors. Here's a post on this:

https://absolutewrite.com/forums/showthread.php?302447-Mention-previous-agent-in-query-letter

After a long time in the query trenches, I finally found a wonderful agent. It's a much healthier relationship. However, the editors are also really oversubscribed and it's very tough out there in the submission trenches too.

I wish you all the best and hope you find a happier, healthier agent relationship!

At a glance, most of the agented writers over on the Next Circle of Hell thread (myself included) are on agent number 2 and upwards. You'll find plenty of support there and on our query trench thread, The Daily Rejection.

It's super common. Personally, I included my trade-pubbed work in my bio but didn't include any references to my previous agent, and my current agent didn't ask.

I'm UK based and the number of YA agents is not huge (70-80 at best). There's a reasonable chance whoever I approach will know (or know of) my old agent. It's a small community.

Click to expand...

UK here also, I still don't think it requires mentioning unless asked. Most UK agents are skilled at Google-fu, if they're curious they'll probably look it up themselves.

I don't want new agents to think I'm still working with the old agent, but fishing around for a better deal.

Click to expand...

I really don't think they'll assume that, especially if your writer website has no mention of your agent. (If you had your agent in your bio or contact page, I'd raise an eyebrow, but that's it.)

I almost wonder whether I'm best off not mentioning my published books or agents when approaching but as that's going to come out if an agent is interested... I sort of have no choice.

Click to expand...

I know you had a rough time with your previous books, but please don't hesitate to include them in your bio. They're an important part of your successes as a writer -- getting a trade-published series is a HUGE achievement. I'm sorry it feels tarnished for you now.

So here's my question: will a new agent talk to your old agent, or just evaluate the book for itself? IOW is it like finding a new job, where they call your old one?

I'm a writer who's switched agents. I'm also a former long-time literary agent.

Publishing is a clubby sort of business, and while some agents steal clients, most recoil at the idea of taking a client away from a colleague. When I switched agents, the first question my new agent asked is "Does J. know?" (J being my former agent.) I said that I'd already told her. "Good," the new agent said, "because if you hadn't, I would have." So it's never smart to go behind your agent's back. Chances are, he'll hear about it and the writer will end up losing both the bird in the hand and the bird in the bush.

But this doesn't apply to you. You've gone about this the right and respectful way: You've let your current agent know, you've approached other agents...and you've been rejected. There are a bunch of possible reasons for that, but the fact that you're looking to switch agents is unlikely to be one. It happens for all sorts of reasons. The only way that hurts you is if you go around trashing the agent, in which case any other agent you talk to figures he'll be next in line, so no thanks. Best to assume that your old agent is best friends with all those prospective agents you've got on your list, and speak accordingly.

Agents care about sales history, because the publishers to whom they pitch care about it. These days there's no fudging---editors and agents can and will check how many copies you've sold. If they see a pattern of declining sales, that's problematic because it makes the agent's job harder. It's actually easier to sell an unpublished writer than one with a history of disappointing sales. And by disappointing, I mean in relation to expectations. You could have two books that each sell 50K in hardcover. Book A wasn't expected to do that well and is hailed as a breakthrough for the writer. But Book B was expected to sell 100K, resulting in a load of remainders and little prospect of making back the advance and other expenses. That writer's rep and ability to command good advances --maybe even to sell her books---is going to take a hit.

So there's that. And there's the usual challenge of finding an agent who (1) falls in love with your writing and (2) knows how to sell it. Every agent is different, tastes vary, trends change...finding the right match is crucial but never easy, no matter where you are in the publishing ecosystem. But the way I see it, selling a book to a serious publisher is always an uphill battle. Staying published over the course of your career (unless you're in the Stephen King bracket) is an uphill battle. Everything in publishing is an uphill battle! The only way to win is to blow people away: to deliver a book so irresistible that they can't call themselves publishers/agents if they don't buy it. Then nothing else will matter--all the negatives get washed away. "Good enough" won't cut it; "superb" is what we need to aim for.

So if you're getting a whole bunch of rejections, especially near misses, try taking it as a challenge and have another go at the book before continuing down the list.

Good luck!

Thanks for the detail, Barbara R. I'm wondering about this:

Barbara R. said:

Agents care about sales history, because the publishers to whom they pitch care about it. These days there's no fudging---editors and agents can and will check how many copies you've sold. If they see a pattern of declining sales, that's problematic because it makes the agent's job harder. It's actually easier to sell an unpublished writer than one with a history of disappointing sales. And by disappointing, I mean in relation to expectations. You could have two books that each sell 50K in hardcover. Book A wasn't expected to do that well and is hailed as a breakthrough for the writer. But Book B was expected to sell 100K, resulting in a load of remainders and little prospect of making back the advance and other expenses. That writer's rep and ability to command good advances --maybe even to sell her books---is going to take a hit.

Click to expand...

I know it's subjective at a certain level, but in your opinion, in this situation, does it even make sense to try to acquire another agent? Would the author be better served looking for other publishing avenues (e.g. self)?

Just chiming in to say that I'm on my second agent, and I know a number of other writers who are, too. It's not uncommon, but as you point out, RaggyCat, it's not all that talked about. I think because it often feels like a failure on the writer's part, if that makes sense.

When querying again I didn't mention being previously agented in my queries, but it came up pretty quickly in the call with my new agent when we were talking about my writing history. You should definitely mention your previous books. If nothing else, it shows you have a professional work ethic and produced work publishers believed in before.

Barbara R. said:

Agents care about sales history, because the publishers to whom they pitch care about it. These days there's no fudging---editors and agents can and will check how many copies you've sold. If they see a pattern of declining sales, that's problematic because it makes the agent's job harder. It's actually easier to sell an unpublished writer than one with a history of disappointing sales. And by disappointing, I mean in relation to expectations. You could have two books that each sell 50K in hardcover. Book A wasn't expected to do that well and is hailed as a breakthrough for the writer. But Book B was expected to sell 100K, resulting in a load of remainders and little prospect of making back the advance and other expenses. That writer's rep and ability to command good advances --maybe even to sell her books---is going to take a hit.

Click to expand...

I'm not in the same situation as the OP, but I have a question about this. What if the BookScan number represents half or fewer of your actual sales? (This seems like a common situation in YA, where a lot of books are sold to libraries, schools, etc.) I have a feeling the answer is "Tough luck" or "If you need to ask, the difference isn't likely to matter," but I'm still curious about how agents and editors approach that discrepancy.

Fuchsia Groan said:

I'm not in the same situation as the OP, but I have a question about this. What if the BookScan number represents half or fewer of your actual sales? (This seems like a common situation in YA, where a lot of books are sold to libraries, schools, etc.) I have a feeling the answer is "Tough luck" or "If you need to ask, the difference isn't likely to matter," but I'm still curious about how agents and editors approach that discrepancy.

Click to expand...

FWIW, my former agent was well aware that BookScan was inaccurate - she assumed it represented anywhere from 40% to 60% of actual sales. How this plays into the "did you sell enough"calculus I don't know, but I suspect most industry people aren't going to use BookScan numbers as absolutes.

I know it's subjective at a certain level, but in your opinion, in this situation, does it even make sense to try to acquire another agent? Would the author be better served looking for other publishing avenues (e.g. self)?

It is subjective, so let me say upfront that after a whole career spend in publishing, wearing various hats, I'm a big advocate of commercial publishing over self-publishing in most, not all, instances. I won't go into all the reasons here, but if you're interested they're covered in this blog post. The OP's situation is not as dire as all that. Declining sales on older books is just another boulder in a road strewn with them. An agent who falls in love with the new book will argue that the older work wasn't handled correctly or supported by his former publisher, or just that this new one is a very different sort of book. The editor who falls in love will make the same argument to her editorial board. My own sales numbers were never huge (except for one book, SUSPICION, that was strongly supported by my publisher and did very well, making various lists.) But I keep gettting published (knock on wood), even after changing publishers a number of times. Never underestimate the power of an editor in love with a book!

Self-publishing generally works best after a writer has been publishing traditionally for a while. "Hybrid" writers with books in both camps seem the happiest and best paid these days. I would encourage the OP to keep trying agents, including doing another edit if he's gotten substantive feedback that he agrees with. If that doesn't fly---thank God we have alternatives these days!

I'm afraid I've never had an agent so have nothing meaningful to add. However, here is a (((hug))). I hope it all works out for you.

lizmonster said:

FWIW, my former agent was well aware that BookScan was inaccurate - she assumed it represented anywhere from 40% to 60% of actual sales. How this plays into the "did you sell enough"calculus I don't know, but I suspect most industry people aren't going to use BookScan numbers as absolutes.

Click to expand...

Thank you, that's good to hear. I think BookScan records maybe 30 percent of my sales, and I've heard of even lower percentages from other YA writers.