The Knight Agency (Deidre Knight)

[agentpaper]

I think the most concerning thing of all this isn't the self-publishing stuff, but the behavior of the agency and Ms. Diver toward this author. I'm shocked to say the least, and a bit appalled actually. I'm not so sure that I'll be recommending authors in this direction any more, which is a shame because I've met Ms. Diver several times and liked her.

 

[MysteryScribe]

I think the most concerning thing of all this isn't the self-publishing stuff, but the behavior of the agency and Ms. Diver toward this author. I'm shocked to say the least, and a bit appalled actually. I'm not so sure that I'll be recommending authors in this direction any more, which is a shame because I've met Ms. Diver several times and liked her.

I'm with you on that. I'm STUNNED by TKA's explosive response, especially after the author posted a follow up detailing why SHE was uncomfortable. I felt in no way, shape, or form influenced against TKA by her (the author's) take on the original letter she received.

(Aren't people allowed to have opinions in this country? If she doesn't like the way something smells, she can say so. If I like roses, she's not going to stop me from smelling them. Know what I mean?)

In fact, I was really impressed by how she STILL praised both Lucienne, and the agency. (I was thinking, 'wow, they must really be AMAZING for her to stand by them, when it don't look so good.') That is...until they (TKA) responded.

What a shame. The only integrity damage that was done, was by their reckless twitter assault of someone's opinion. I'm sure they could have found a better way to resolve the issue, without turning it into an interwebs war. Boo-hiss.

 

[Bubastes]

Boo hiss is right. I'm disappointed by TKA's response as well, which is a shame. It illustrates that agents can damage their reputation via internet as easily as authors.

 

[eqb]

TKA and Bookends have both posted statements that make me think they aren't aware of the conflict of interest inherent in their latest ventures. (Not that my opinion means anything here or elsewhere.) My gut instincts say to avoid these arrangements unless everything is spelled out better--how long the contracts last, what kind of rights are licensed, etc.

 

[DeadlyAccurate]

The number of agents left for me to query is dwindling every day.

 

[Filigree]

Well, that settles that. Not that it matters much in my case, because I never got a reply to my last query. Still, I'm glad Ms. Hoyt chose to bring this to our attention.

In the end, it really doesn't matter whether TKA is or is not doing publishing as well as agenting, or that many TKA agents are also writers. Done properly, these ventures can only benefit the agency and its authors.

But the reaction of TKA to Ms. Hoyt's post makes me uncomfortable to have any future dealings with this agency.

 

[Kasey Mackenzie]

I think this whole unfortunate back-and-forth between former agency and author shows why most authors keep mostly mum on why they end relationships with their former agents. Not that I'm stating that's a good or bad thing. It just is. Shows one of the reasons why many people compare agent relationships to marriages; they rarely end well, even when one or both sides still profess to have admiration for the other.

I'm still formulating my own thoughts and opinions on agencies assisting clients with self-publishing, but my 10+ years in the legal field tell me that many agents are way under-estimating just how important avoiding even the appearance of a conflict of interest can be in fiduciary relationships.

 

[Bubastes]

I'm still formulating my own thoughts and opinions on agencies assisting clients with self-publishing, but my 10+ years in the legal field tell me that many agents are way under-estimating just how important avoiding even the appearance of a conflict of interest can be in fiduciary relationships.

I'm seriously thinking of doing some research into agency law. I'm surprised no agents have mentioned getting legal advice about this new endeavor. So far, it's been a lot of hand-waving and bald reassurances.

 

[Filigree]

Yep, and the hand-waving reassurances make me nervous. I think it's a great thing that TKA wants to keep their clients' backlists alive, especially given the number of publishers going belly-up, getting reorganized, or abandoning writers who slip into midlist. The Long Tail of marketing says there's still lots of money for obscure and out-of-print works.

That said, this is a plainly a publishing venture. I don't know yet if it will make money for TKA and the signatory writers. I can't guess how it will impact newer writers signing on with TKA. There's still a lot of legal ground to cover, before anyone will know.

I'd prefer not to be in the experimental pile.

 

[Miguelito]

Does the AAR have any opinions on these kinds of self-publishing services these agencies are offering

Edited to add:

I'm kind of torn on the issue.

I see this as an important niche being filled by industry professionals. Whether it's making a back list available or putting new material into the market, this can be good for the author to maybe earn some money or build or expand a platform. For new authors who are looking at self-publishing, it certainly could help an author put their book a notch above most other self-published books, which often have sub-standard covers and no copy editing.

However, there is the appearance of conflict of interest between the agency arm and the self-publishing service arm. Sure, they may be able to keep the self-publishing service separate from their agency obligations to their clients, because, no doubt, these are very reputable people. But, legally, even the appearance of a conflict can cause real problems (I have to worry about that kind of thing in my day job). In any kind of lawsuit, a judge may consider the agency to be on shaky ground for even allowing such an obvious appearance of conflict to exist.

And like was said above, I wonder how much legal advice they got before they started with this venture.

 

[kellion92]

I'm guessing that the agency is calling it "assisted self-publishing" in an attempt to avoid conflicts of interest with publishers, but I wonder what publishers think.

It does seem that the agency didn't consider deeply of what writers would think, other than they would be grateful for the agency's continued benevolence and hand-holding in the scary world of e-publishing.

 

[priceless1]

Anyone who buys an ISBN (which lists them as the publisher), does copy editing, cover design, and then submits the completed project to the online databases is an e-publisher. Check the copyright page - whose name is listed as being the publisher?

It doesn't matter how much TKA tries to insist they're not a publisher - facts verify the opposite, and it's a shame they have bullied an author in the process. How does this instill confidence in their abilities and honesty?

 

[kellion92]

Interesting, Priceless. Would you view a submission differently if it came from an agency that you knew was e-publishing books in the genre? Would it influence your negotiations on such issues as reversion of rights and e-publishing rights?

 

[priceless1]

Interesting, Priceless. Would you view a submission differently if it came from an agency that you knew was e-publishing books in the genre? Would it influence your negotiations on such issues as reversion of rights and e-publishing rights?

Chances are I'd avoid an agent who has a publishing arm because of the conflict of interest. Their heads are now in two competing business models, so I worry they're not adequately representing their authors. This means there is invariably a breakdown in communication - the lifeblood of the agent/author/editor relationship.

Besides, I don't want to work with someone who's competing my my particular world.

 

[SteveCordero]

A couple of things: First, I think both TKA and the Author handled this poorly. It seemed like TKA was surprised by the original post on 7/27 which elicited TKA's misguided response. Did they not talk about this before hand? Did the Author get the letter and then post saying she was dumping the agency?

Second, As to TKA's venture, I'm really not sure, but they couldn't handle the PR any worse. Helping your clients with the heavy lifting of self-pub is a GOOD thing. Is TKA's venture more than that? That's up to debate.

Third, Kellion points out something very important, and it really undermines the "conflict of interest" claim.

Literary agents are ALREADY in a conflict of interest relationship with clients. Agents seek to maintain relationships with publishers and they can represent clients in direct competition with each other. For that reason, I've never viewed literary agents as true fiduciaries.

I'm an attorney practicing law for over a decade. In my law practice I could never do the equivelent of what literary agents do with their clients. I can't rep clients in competition or maintain my relationship with a judge/court to the potential detriment of my client.

This is in no way to disparage literary agents, or imply that their practices are "shady" or what have you. I'm just pointing out the nature of the pub business and in the pub business, lit agents aren't the client's fiduciaries. They're middlemen.

Now how does this tie back to TKA's venture? It's a matter of knowledge. Does this venture make a client believe that TKA won't use their best efforts to sell to big pubs? That's personal to the client. I also don't know if the TKA venture would generate more revenue for it than selling a book to a pub house. That is the real conflict, right? Monetary incentive.

 

[priceless1]

If TKA was surprised by Sarah's 7/27 post, then they're naive. There has been blowouts all over the internet about agents who decide to play publisher, so they can't cry because this move angers one of their client authors. She explains herself very clearly, and it's easy to see why she's upset. She said:

So you could say I’m unagented because the agency my agent works for no longer believes the old model is viable, and I don’t agree with their concept of the new model.

Where is the untruth to this? OTOH, TKA is trying to convince their authors that they haven't entered into the publishing realm, but are "facilitators." One does not publish an ebook and get away with that description. It's publishing, plain and simple.

 

[Old Hack]

Literary agents are ALREADY in a conflict of interest relationship with clients. Agents seek to maintain relationships with publishers and they can represent clients in direct competition with each other. For that reason, I've never viewed literary agents as true fiduciaries.

You're assuming, though, that all books are the same. And they're not.

An agent's clients are not in competition with one another because they will each have written very different books, even if they work in the same genre. They might be offered to the same publishers: but often they'll be offered to different imprints or editors within those publishers; they'll very rarely be offered at the same time, as writers are unlikely to deliver their works simultaneously and even if they do, a smart agent will send the books out on submission at different times.

I could go on, but I don't want to take this thread any futher off-topic than I already have. But I did want to comment on your view.

 

[kellion92]

Old Hack, I think your example shows that clients ARE in competition. An agent may reserve certain editors or imprints for a favored client or book, bypassing or putting off another in the same genre. If the first client gets a deal, the second one in the same genre probably doesn't have a chance with that editor this go-round. Even if the first client DOESN'T get a deal, the agent may have "used up" his chances with the editor for the time being.

The two books aren't the same, but they are competing. Editors have limited slots and the majority of agents have limited opportunities to get in front of each editor.

 

[priceless1]

I've seen cases of favoritism with agents - where they work harder to sell one author over another - but these were cases where the author was very well-established as opposed to the debut author who hasn't a readership. The agent needs to think about the ability to stay in business, and that means the author for whom they can get the largest advance will get the most attention. You can call it competition, but it's not a conflict of interest because those two authors can't be compared.

To bring this back on course, I understand why agencies are adding publishing to their services, but unlike spending more time and energy selling their established author, agents are putting themselves at risk with the look of impropriety. If an agent says, "Sorry, Jane Author, but I couldn't sell your book, but how 'bout publishing with us," is Jane Author going to believe them, or will she worry about the fact that the agent didn't try to sell the book?

'Tis a big difference.

 

[rugcat]

The publishing industry is in flux, and any new business model is going to need time to resolve problems.

I can see a conflict of interests, but as has been pointed out, the current model is rife with them anyway. One example: When you sell a book to a publisher, you get a percentage on each book sold. But who keeps track of the numbers? Who does the accounting? Why, the publisher. The less books they report, the less they owe the author. Seems like a conflict there to me.

TKA seems to be offering -- offering, not requiring -- a service to their clients. Many authors have a backlist, books no longer being printed. With an agents help, they can get the rights reverted. Then, they can self publish them as ebooks.

But not everyone is willing to go through the hassles of formatting, getting cover art, placing them, marketing, etc. The time and effort involved could be better spent in, well, in writing. And some tech challenged authors are actually incapable of doing that. Sure, you can hire an outside facilitator, but that costs money upfront and you don't know what you'll be getting.

The option of letting your agency handle it, folks you trust to do a good job, people you have a relationship with, is very tempting. 15% of your revenue seems a small price to pay.

Or, as happens to many series authors, sales slip. You've written four books in your series, and you want to continue. But your last book only sold 7000 copies and your publisher doesn't want another. Your fans do, there's just not enough of them. And future books in the series will boost backlist sales of the earlier print copies.

But sales are king. Your agent can't sell the idea to any major publisher. So again, self pubbing, where you get most of the money, seems attractive.

And your agent who may have spent years as an editor, who knows your books and your writing style, will help you get the ms into the best shape possible -- just like he or she does before submitting to editors. But no editor wants the book

So you go through the same process as usual, except the agency takes care of everything else, the way a traditional publisher would, with no money upfront, for a percentage -- the same as selling a book.

I don't think it's a bad idea at all. It may not be for everyone, but you don't have to go that route unless you want to.

And especially, if you've been with an agency for years, you develop a relationship with your agent. They aren't there to squeeze extra money out of you, they're there to help your career. And the few that aren't are going to find a way to rip you off no matter what business model is the vehicle

 

[priceless1]

When you sell a book to a publisher, you get a percentage on each book sold. But who keeps track of the numbers? Who does the accounting? Why, the publisher. The less books they report, the less they owe the author. Seems like a conflict there to me.

It's no more conflict than any subcontractor who sells their product to a distributor. The distributor keeps track of sales and accounting. It's a stretch to imply this is a conflict. It's doing business, and far different from agents becoming publishers.

TKA seems to be offering -- offering, not requiring -- a service to their clients. Many authors have a backlist, books no longer being printed. With an agents help, they can get the rights reverted. Then, they can self publish them as ebooks.

This is fine for backlist or OP titles. But how is the author to trust someone whose job it is to sell their manuscripts when they have their own publishing services? The question arises about how hard they worked to sell the book to an outside publisher when they have their own in-house. It may be perfectly above board, but there is a distinct conflict.

 

[DeadlyAccurate]

But it's not just out-of-print back list. It's also books the agent couldn't place. It would be very easy to just sort of let things slide, not send pitch letters you mean to send, not come up with the most complete list of editors you could, not try the smaller houses that don't pay quite the same advance as the big ones. And all because you have a backup plan in place.

 

[rugcat]

This is fine for backlist or OP titles. But how is the author to trust someone whose job it is to sell their manuscripts when they have their own publishing services? The question arises about how hard they worked to sell the book to an outside publisher when they have their own in-house. It may be perfectly above board, but there is a distinct conflict.

There may be. What it really comes down to is whether you trust your agent.

My agent handles UF, among other things. She has other clients who write UF. How can I trust her to do her best by me when she's also representing a different author with a similar book? There aren't unlimited slots available.

But it's not just out-of-print back list. It's also books the agent couldn't place.

A good point. There are many cases where an agent absolutely loves a book and tries to place it, even though she knows it's quirky and going to be a hard sell. Sometimes she can't.

I see your point -- that if there's an in-house option, maybe she won't try as hard. But one, it's an option The agent can't decide to go that route; it's the author who gets to make that decision.

And two, once again, it depends on the agent -- I happen to trust mine implicitly to assist me on deciding what's best for me. Me, not her. (And she has no interest in following the Knight model, so for me it's all hypothetical.)

I do see the inherent conflict of interest. I just don't think it's necessarily large enough to dismiss the model out of hand.

 

[rugcat]

I wonder if the latter part of this thread should be ported over to the Roundtable. Knight may be the first, but certainly not the last to think about doing this -- I've heard that the Maass Agency, for one, is considering something similar.

It may go by the wayside, but many believe it's also quite possible that it will become almost standard as agencies, as well as authors, attempt to deal with the dwindling book market and the closure of retail outlets.

So I think it's certainly of general interest.

 

[Miguelito]

The publishing industry is in flux, and any new business model is going to need time to resolve problems.

I can see a conflict of interests, but as has been pointed out, the current model is rife with them anyway. One example: When you sell a book to a publisher, you get a percentage on each book sold. But who keeps track of the numbers? Who does the accounting? Why, the publisher. The less books they report, the less they owe the author. Seems like a conflict there to me.

TKA seems to be offering -- offering, not requiring -- a service to their clients. Many authors have a backlist, books no longer being printed. With an agents help, they can get the rights reverted. Then, they can self publish them as ebooks.

But not everyone is willing to go through the hassles of formatting, getting cover art, placing them, marketing, etc. The time and effort involved could be better spent in, well, in writing. And some tech challenged authors are actually incapable of doing that. Sure, you can hire an outside facilitator, but that costs money upfront and you don't know what you'll be getting.

The option of letting your agency handle it, folks you trust to do a good job, people you have a relationship with, is very tempting. 15% of your revenue seems a small price to pay.

Or, as happens to many series authors, sales slip. You've written four books in your series, and you want to continue. But your last book only sold 7000 copies and your publisher doesn't want another. Your fans do, there's just not enough of them. And future books in the series will boost backlist sales of the earlier print copies.

But sales are king. Your agent can't sell the idea to any major publisher. So again, self pubbing, where you get most of the money, seems attractive.

And your agent who may have spent years as an editor, who knows your books and your writing style, will help you get the ms into the best shape possible -- just like he or she does before submitting to editors. But no editor wants the book

So you go through the same process as usual, except the agency takes care of everything else, the way a traditional publisher would, with no money upfront, for a percentage -- the same as selling a book.

I don't think it's a bad idea at all. It may not be for everyone, but you don't have to go that route unless you want to.

And especially, if you've been with an agency for years, you develop a relationship with your agent. They aren't there to squeeze extra money out of you, they're there to help your career. And the few that aren't are going to find a way to rip you off no matter what business model is the vehicle

A good post. I agree with pretty much all of it. There's a real need for this kind of service and if agents don't fill that gap for their clients, somebody else will.

But:

If an author has an issue with how the agency handles the self-pubbing of the book (whether it's the copy-editing, cover work, collecting of revenues, etc...), who does the author turn to for help?

Their agent?

At that point, the agent is caught in a complete conflict of interest between their obligations to their client and the agency, who pays their salary.

Acceptable practices for this kind of thing really need to be hammered out.

And I agree that this discussion should be moved to another thread.