National Mediation Group

First, I have worked with several agents and published as a midlist writer. Mediocre sales, fairly typical arc, with some exceptions. I’ve also self-published recently to tremendous satisfaction. I responded to both Jane’s and Victoria’s posts and I’d like to see more creativity from “agents.” The original Latin root is “action.” All in all, I have been very lucky and happy because I enjoy the work.

First, I am not convinced most agents are qualified to revise manuscripts. Otherwise, they would be writers. I am more convinced they understand their job and what they need for the job–currently, manuscripts that sell to editors. Right now, that is pretty much the job. I am not sure that job will be there in five years, at least below bestseller status. I understand the many, many reasons for rejection, which really boil down to “I don’t think I can sell this to a publisher.” Simple enough. Like “I don’t think I love you,” it’s not really a position that invites debate.

But what if there’s an audience of readers out there beyond the few dozen editors? What if you can make 10 or 5 percent from a lifelong (or life of copyright) stream of income in various media? What if instead of seeking the slam-dunk and cashing your check, you tend your garden and help writers blossom and find their audiences? What if you became a matchmaker–instead of “selling” translation rights, why not find translators for your authors and publish all over the world? What if you developed a reliable team of app artists for the coming transmedia era? What if you became the “agent” who knew the best book cover designers and digital formatters and emerging filmmakers? What if you envisioned an entirely new money flow that wasn’t one single pipeline? What if you ventured out into the world of readers and book audiences and actually understood what they wanted, instead of whatever looked to be the trendy genre of the moment?

I believe these people are already percolating, and I am not sure veteran agents will be able to adapt fast enough, especially given the interest in preserving the current model. Agents have had it great for a decade–15 percent, no application or training required, lots of hopeful writer-followers on your blog, a very small customer base in which to deal. But now it looks like the hardest job in the world, because nobody really needs you in order to succeed. For most writers, an agent now looks more like a roadblock into the many smaller pipelines. In an era when Amazon delivers a writer directly to readers for a mere 30 percent cut, you will have a hard time justifying to me that you deserve 5 percent, much less 20 percent.

Of course, if you DO get the big sale and, then you deserve every penny of your 15 percent. And I’ll even buy lunch.

Scott Nicholson
http://www.hauntedcomputer.com

The responses here are no exception. My, what a lightning rod this topic is.

And yes, I have a strong opinion.

I have an agent. And I’ve queried many, many more in the past. I’ve met them at conferences. I’ve talked to a few on the phone in the midst of making a final decision on offers of representation.

And none of them has been anything but honest, professional, and kind to me. Even in rejection. If I had a dollar for every useful suggestion or tidbit of advice on craft I’ve received in a query, partial, or full rejection, I’d have enough to buy a very expensive bottle of wine.

Guess what. These agents, interns, and editors are actual (gasp!) human beings, not descendants of trolls, demons, or giant deer ticks.

I repeat, Mr. Ashlock is not a deer tick. He’s a gracious, approachable person who is open to new ideas.

And my own agent?

I can’t say enough good things about her. Her expertise and knowledge base are invaluable to me. I’m thrilled to have such a fierce advocate.

In my experience, agents aren’t out to get people. They are people.
@jmartinlibrary´s last [type] ..Happy Book Birthday- PAUL IS UNDEAD by Alan Goldsher

For future models, I do not know. As I noted in the above comment response, I don’t want it to be the author. For the model we use the answer to who pays is simple: everybody.

Movable Type isn’t paid for any additional work–we still take the standard 15% commission for our work, though our methodology includes numerous additional efforts that weren’t listed under an agent’s job description when that commission was agreed-upon, and we don’t get any run-off or kick-backs from the services we recommend or arrange. The extra effort is subsidized by all the players in the mix: agent, author, publisher, and third-party consultant. We have strategic partnerships with various players–from web designers to digital managers to videographers to publicity firms to career consultants to branding strategists–that have reduced their rates for our clients; so they are subsidizing. The author himself or herself is, under our guidance, encouraged to look at their personal finances, their advance monies, their grant opportunities, and determine what amount they’re able to invest in their own career (“You are,” as I said, “your own start-up,” and so we recommend 20-35% of one’s advance monies be invested in a personalized, targeted campaign that’s a mix of resources); so the authors are subsidizing. We have on a couple of occasions (and imagine we’ll do so again, in select circumstances), deferred our 15% commission, opting to take it out of later advance installments rather than the first one or two installments, so that the author can have the capital to invest in the resources that can find his or her audience; so we as an agency are subsidizing. And several times over the past year, we have successfully negotiated with the publishers to allot money for publicity (yes, all independent publishers, but one takes a win where one can get it!); so publishers subsidize too.

Yes, it looks different each time. And it should–because each project is different. Are we making more money as agents off this? Not in the short term. It’s likely, honestly, that we’re making less. But we believe in the model: if we bring the resources to the table that can awaken our writers’ audiences, then they will sell more books, find their core loyals faster, be better positioned for second and third books, and our client list will, as a collective, hold more value than it would without these efforts.

Thanks for your thoughts, Randy–and I welcome further critique!

The technologies and tools to change it all and yank the carpet out from under the slow moving giants exists. People just have to grab the edge and pull. What would be really good is for enough smaller publishing companies to rise up and change the industry. Little is gained by having a core of massive companies at the top of any industry and in today’s market the massive size of the big publishing houses is actually more of a hindrance than a help.

Their position is weak, even if they don’t know it. But I suspect that many of them do know, which is why they take so much time to tell us all that it isn’t, that everything is fine, and that business as normal should continue.

PR is their biggest and most effective weapon.

I know. Let’s wring it from the writers.

Squeezing water from a stone is nothing to god. Nothing.
Tim Barrus´s last [type] ..The getting out to get there to arrive to be — no easy task — remains inevitably