James D. Macdonald said:
It's really the wrong model to think about the "odds" at some publisher. This is a game of skill, not a game of chance. If they don't see a manuscript they like in a given month they aren't going to buy one they don't like just to keep up their average.
Send them a manuscript they'll like.
Eek! Wrong choice of words by me, methinks. We all - I would hope - want to send in a manuscript a publisher will like, but six titles from 600 submissions? I would think given the 'odds' even some well written books are rejected for whatever reason.
In a previous life, when I managed a large division of a company that covered the whole of the UK, i received countless applications whenever a job vacancy was advertised, and I used various, probably un PC methods, of rejecting most and possibly missed out on some quite brilliant applicants. But when you receive hundreds of sheaths of paper after one poisition, and do not have the time or manpower to give every one of them justice, certain methods have to be used to eliminate a large proportion, and, given the oversubscribing to publishing houses for the few contracts available, it would be a wonder if such 'inappropriate' methods were used to reject a large proportion before they actually get near a commissioning editor. Having discussed such matters with two editors at major publishing houses, I know they never see every ms that comes in, only the few that get through whatever screening process they have set in place.
My comment was not an attempt at making publishing out to be a game of chance, but to highlight how many of us would like to be published but how few actually make it. And yes, I have been published both in novel format and short story. Maybe not as prolific as some on his site, but have been there, and would like some more of it please.
Anyway, ramble over. Just thought I would clear my point.
Have fun,
Steve