The Perils of Query Blasting

Spend a little time searching for agents online and you’re bound to come across any number of websites that promise to send queries to agents for you, in exchange for a fee. These sites are commonly referred to as Query Blasters. They offer a pretty tempting proposition to writers who hate the whole submission process, which, let’s face it, is most of us. Some of you have even asked us to add this kind of service to LitMatch, and though we value your feedback and hate to disappoint, we’re not going to. That’s because query blasting almost always does more harm than good.

The reasons are many. First, a blasting service puts an additional, unnecessary step between you and the agent you want to reach. You’ve spent months, perhaps even years, developing your project and honing your query letter, slaving over and perfecting every word. Are you willing to trust your first impression to the publishing world to someone who hasn’t read your book, doesn’t understand your goals, and, frankly, doesn’t care if you succeed? You’re far better off eliminating the middleman and sending the query yourself.

Second, query blasting doesn’t let you tailor your query to the agents you’re submitting to. Personalization means a lot, and if your query tells an agent that you’ve read other books he’s represented and because of that, you feel he’d be interested in your book, that makes an impression. There’s no way around it; that kind of judgment is one that only you can make. It’s your book, it’s your future, and that means it has to be your search, too.

Third, blasted queries have a higher chance of being ignored or missed by they’re sent to. Because query blasters tend to use volume as a selling point, your query is likely to get blasted to agents who don’t represent they type of book you’re selling. Worse than that, blasted queries often originate from a single email address, and when an agent sees a bunch of queries for irrelevant projects coming from one source, it will look a lot like spam and will be treated accordingly. Even if you have that agent’s dream project, it could still get tossed aside like so much trash.

Finally, there’s nothing a query blaster can do that you can’t do better. Most of them work through email, and how hard is it to push the send button? Check to make sure an agent actually wants emails before you do, and you’ve increased your chances dramatically. Spend a little time personalizing your query, and your chances go up again!

The short advice: don’t waste your money.

Trading money for a savings in time is fine, but before you part with a single penny, you need to make sure that the money you spend is going to have the effect you want. Otherwise, you’re just throwing your hard-earned cash down a deep, dark hole.

Christopher Hawkins
LitMatch.net

New Features – Charts, Stat Upgrades, “Your Titles” Page

If you subscribe to our monthly newsletter, this next bit of news is old news to you. But if you don’t subscribe (and if you don’t, then what are you waiting for? Log in to your account and check the box to opt in,) we have some big changes in store for you…

The first, most obvious, and some might even say sexiest change is the addition of pie charts to our agent and agency detail pages. These charts make comparing response data easier by providing a quick, visual representation of the number of rejections, offers and requests for additional materials. They also appear right inside the agent’s (or agency’s) listing, so you won’t have to go hunting to find the stats you need.

Next, we redesigned the “Your Titles” page from the ground up. Gone is the simple list of titles and word counts. In its place is a robust information center that brings together essential submission statistics, genre information, and—you guessed it—charts! We’ve also added sorting options, for those of you shopping more than one project at a time, that let you sort titles alphabetically, by word count, or by the number of submissions you've entered for each one.

The redesign comes with an upgrade to our statistics reporting package that makes your own personal response information a lot easier to find and evaluate. Naturally, all these changes come with a downside: in order to keep the page from getting bogged down, we can only show you three of your titles at any given time (though you can still enter and track as many as you like). But once you’ve had a chance to check out all the new features on this page, we think you’ll forgive us this small limitation.

We have more changes in store for later this month, as well as a few additional surprises we think you’ll enjoy. In the meantime, we’d like to hear your feedback about these changes, as well as any suggestions you have for helping us improve the site. Drop us a note at suggestions@litmatch.net.

Chris Hawkins
LitMatch.net

One Year Later...

Last September, LitMatch made its way onto the Internet with very little fanfare and a simple goal: to help writers in their search for representation and, ultimately, publication. We've had a few bumps along the way, but as I sit here, one year later, and look back at what we have accomplished in that short time, I am filled with pride and no small amount of awe.

When I say "we", I'm not just talking about myself and the others who helped design and build LitMatch. By "we" I mean each and every person who has reported a submission, sent us a tip about an agent or agency, suggested ways to improve the site, posted a blog or forum message to help spread the word, emailed us with a kind word, or even just used the site for research. Without our users and supporters, we are nothing, and the success we've found is because of each and every one of you.

So, here's to the first of what I hope will be many, many years of helping writers connect with agents, and many, many years of saying to you, all of you:

Thanks.

Sincerely,

Christopher Hawkins
LitMatch.net