More Rejections


Only twothree more rejections lately:


27.02 – Conville & Walsh (snail mail)


They say they ‘read it with interest’ and ‘enjoyed it’ but it’s not for them.

27.02 – Toby Eades Associates (nicest letter so far)

Thank you for writing to us about your work and apologies for the delay in getting back to you.
Although it promises to make for an enjoyable read, unfortunately we do not feel that it is quite right for our agency, but we wish you every success in finding representation elsewhere.

(There’s a blurb in there somewhere, if I were feeling naughty 😉

22.02 – Laura Dail Literary Agency

Please forgive this impersonal note but the high volume of correspondence makes it difficult for us to respond to you personally. Thank you for your query. Unfortunately it doesn’t match what we are looking for at this time. We hope other agents feel differently.


And the reward for the rudest agency goes to…

Anubis LLA.

Just a scribbled ‘Not for us’ on the margin of the cover letter.

The hell…?

If you can’t be bothered so much, why do you insist on snail-mail submissions? Those things cost money, you know.

*

Only one other rejection this week, from Kirsten Wolf of Wolf Literary Services. Standard rejection, but much nicer in tone than most.

Rejections summary 1

11.02 – London Independent Books (s-mail)

We regret, however, that they did not quite ‘click’ with us and it is for this reason that we are returning them to you as we do not like to take on material which we cannot sell with total enthusiasm.

11.02 – Felicity Blunt, Curtis Brown (s-mail)

Although the premise of the story is interesting, I unfortunately did not connect to writing itself the way I would need in order to take it on today’s tough fiction marketplace.

09.02 – Nelson Agency

Thank you so much for sending the Nelson Literary Agency your query. We’d like to apologize for the impersonal nature of this standard rejection letter. On average, we receive about 100 email query letters a day and despite that, we do read each and every query letter carefully. Unfortunately, this project is not right for us. Because this business is so subjective and opinions vary widely, we recommend that you pursue other agents. After all, it just takes one “yes” to find the right match.

07.02 – Frances Collin

Thank you for your query. Unfortunately we do not think the project is right for us.

We receive so many queries that it is not possible to reply in detail on an individual basis. We appreciate your writing and wish you success in your publishing career.

06.02 – Barry Goldblatt

Thank you for your query. Unfortunately, your manuscript doesn’t sound like something that’s right for us. We wish you the best of success in placing your work elsewhere

31.01 – Donald Maas

As to your material I’m afraid I will be passing — I’m just not enthusiastic enough about the concept of your story to feel that I’d be the right agent for the project. I realize it is difficult to judge your potential from a query; nevertheless please know that I give serious attention to every letter, outline, and writing sample I
receive.

30.01 – Marjacq

Thank you for your submission to Marjacq Scripts.
Unfortunately, we did not feel that the agency could place this successfully on your behalf.
May we wish you the best of luck in your search for representation.

30.01 – Robert Kirby

Many thanks for your email. Robert is currently focussing on nonfiction projects so is not taking on any fiction.

First rejections

Well, that was fast! Why can’t all agencies switch to e-mail submissions, again?

Robert Kirby’s assistant said he doesn’t do fiction anymore. Too bad, I liked Kirby’s set of clients.

Marjacq managed to assess my query in half a day and deem it unsuitable. Fair enough, they only had one young adult fantasy book on the clients list, and it doesn’t seem to sell well.