HomeWritersLiterary AgentsEditorsPublishersResourcesDiscussion
Forum Login | Join the discussion
+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 20
  1. #1
    carlos montoya
    Guest

    preditors and editors

    I was looking at the Preditors and Editors website and it seemed to me that the number of publishers not recommended was much higher than the number of publishers who were recommended. So, I did a quick count and it turns out that 189 publishers receive a "not recommended" or "strongly not recommended" rating and only 34 are recommended. My count could be off by one or two, but there's no question that the ratio of not recommended to recommended is better than 5 to 1. I'd be interested in hearing what you think are the reasons for this. Thanks.



  2. #2
    jayce
    Guest

    Re: preditors and editors

    Go back to the Preditors and Editors site, and click on the "Warnings" link. There you will find the different reasons why publishers are not recommended. To find out about a specific publisher, email Preditors and Editors. They don't hide anything, and they have no agenda with the outfits they don't recommended.

    As to your count, I don't know what method you used, but after checking the As alone, my ratio of yes-to-no differed so widely from yours that I quit.

  3. #3
    carlos montoya
    Guest

    Re: preditors and editors

    Dear Jayce,

    I went back and checked the publishers listed at Preditors and Editors beginning with the letter A, and I found that 17 were not recommended and only 2 were. That's a ratio that is clearly much greater than the five to one that I reported for the entire list.

    I didn't mean to imply anything like a hidden agenda on the part of Preditors and Editors; rather I was only curious as to why so relatively few publishers were recommended compared to those not recommended.

    As an unpublished writer, I certainly appreciate learning about publishers that others suggest I avoid; however, I would like to go with one that is recommended, and for what I write (mainstream fiction) the cupboard at Preditors and Editors seems somewhat bare.

    Carlos

  4. #4
    Simon Says
    Guest

    Re: preditors and editors

    Carlos

    I don't believe that Dave has standardized, objective rating system via recommending a particular agent or publisher.

    In fact many of the top tier literary agencies do not have a "recommended" next to their names (ICM, Curtis Brown, William Morris).

    I've asked him to explain his criteria for recommending, but he's told me to start my own website if I don't like his, rather than answering the question.

    He means well, but he doesn't differentiate between those who are scammers and legitimate agents that have business practices that he finds objectionable, while he remains neutral on agencies started by people who have absolutely no experience in publishing or agenting.

    As I said he means well, but I am uncomfortable using his list as my sole vetting source.

  5. #5
    jayce
    Guest

    Re: preditors and editors

    Carlos:

    I see what I did. There's a whole bunch of entries that don't get thumbs up OR down. I treated them as acceptable. (I wasn't very scientific.)

    That aside, I agree with Simon Says. P&E should be only one of your sources.

  6. #6
    Mya Bell
    Guest

    Re: preditors and editors

    No site should be used as a sole source. I would never contact an agent without cross-referencing that agent through at least five different sources (in addition to a Google search for comments from that agent's authors).

    --- Mya Bell

  7. #7
    Anthony Ravenscroft
    Guest

    Re: preditors and editors

    Carlos, my impression was that PredEd "recommends" outlets of which they'd received complaints, & they wished to say, "No, really, it all looks on the up&up, so it's probably just you."

    Merely that you've never been tried for murder & declared innocent by a duly convened court doesn't mean you're under a cloud of suspicion.

  8. #8
    carlos montoya
    Guest

    Re: preditors and editors

    Anthony,

    Would you mind running that past me again? I'm having some trouble figuring out your exact message, particularly the last sentence. Thanks.

    Carlos

  9. #9
    Anthony Ravenscroft
    Guest

    Re: preditors and editors

    Righty, then. Okay, how about this: PredEd isn't meant as a clearinghouse for credible publishers. That's not their remit. They've gotten to the point of warning hopefuls away from outlets that they don't find credible or that are the cause of many complaints.

    You seem to be working from the belief that, if an outlet hasn't been judged guilty or innocent by PredEd, then this indicates it falls to one category or the other, when in fact it's indeterminate.

    If you want to get a list of places you might be able to sell to, you might do better to do your own legwork, go to sites like Ralan, make your own list, & pare it down from there.

  10. #10
    carlos montoya
    Guest

    Re: preditors and editors

    Thanks again Anthony. I think this horse is dead, and my best alternative at this point is to heed your advice and the advice of others here who have underscored the advisability of relying upon several sources as one seeks a publisher for his work. I still remain troubled, nevertheless, at what seems, in my opinion, to be a somewhat arbitrary system used by Preditors and Editors as it evaluates publishers and agents.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts