The Agony of Acquisitions: Notes from a Former Receptor of Slush

Digg This
Reddit This
Stumble Now!
Buzz This
Vote on DZone
Share on Facebook
Bookmark this on Delicious
Kick It on DotNetKicks.com
Shout it
Share on LinkedIn
Bookmark this on Technorati
Post on Twitter
Google Buzz (aka. Google Reader)

When I look back on the many years I spent staring at a stack of manila envelopes with SASEs coming out my ears, it pains my inner control freak. My employers were paying me to be a sponge, a passive receptor of slush. Sure, as an acquisitions editor, much of my time was spent searching for authors at conferences, or skimming trade journals, or listening to the gentle buzz of the blogosphere, but much of it was an exercise in futility.

I truly knew desperation when I worked in the children’s book market. In that niche, the competition is so fierce and the best sellers so few that it’s hard not to pull your hair out when you dive into the slush pile. And to compound the problem, so many, shall we say, “inexperienced” writers think that crafting a picture book is a piece of cake. Keep it short and throw in some talking animals and you’re set, right? Or: “I have a grandson who just loves it when I tell this story.” And no, including a lock of that grandson’s hair with your manuscript isn’t going to make me weep with warm-hearted joy.

At the last children’s publisher I worked for, our inability to find standout authors shut us down. And it was a great job. The best I’ve ever had. And now, alas, it is gone. (Anyone out there in the same boat?)

Since then, I’ve been on a mission. A “pubmission” if you will (har har). What acquisitions editors need—what the publishing industry as a whole needs—is a way to transform our method of discovering new writing talent from a passive to a more active process. The technology has existed for years. Other industries and individuals use it all the time. Think about CareerBuilder, Match.com, even PRWeb. If I’m an employer looking for a specific employee to hire, I’m not going to use my preciously limited time to scour the entire Internet looking for the right person, or pay hundreds of dollars to attend every trade show that features relevant speakers, or hope that by chance someone interested in my company sends me the perfect resume based on my company’s About Us web page. That’s absurd. I’m going to perform a targeted search using Elance or Monster.com or some other online database that helps me filter out the noise.

Pubmission is the new tool that filters out the noise for acquisitions editors. Sure, you can still receive submissions directly (though you can quickly see all of your submissions in one sortable table), but it also lets you search specifically for the things you want to add to your list. As the volume of writers and publishers on the site grows, editors will have the entire database at their fingertips. They won’t have to wait for the perfect submission to magically appear in their slush piles. All they’ll need to do is perform a targeted search. And it doesn’t matter if the writer only sent his work to your competitor. If he submitted it to the general database, you’ll have access to it, too.

I only wish that I’d had this tool a few years ago. It certainly would have cut down on my supply of children’s hair. (Ew, creepy.)

Publishers: Check out our new demo video to learn more about how Pubmission can help you get out from under the slush pile.

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Post to Twitter Post to Delicious Post to Digg Post to Facebook Send Gmail Post to LinkedIn Post to StumbleUpon

About Wolf Hoelscher

Wolf Hoelscher is a writer and editor with 15 years in publishing. He created Pubmission.com as a way to rethink the submissions process and to make it easier for publishers to find the writers who match them best. You can also select Wolf as an Editor Coach on Pubmission.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

One Response to The Agony of Acquisitions: Notes from a Former Receptor of Slush

  1. Kelly Gunzenhauser says:

    The truly unfortunate thing about slush piles is that they put the editor and the writer at an equal disadvantage. Slush piles take up so much of an editor’s time that could be better used. And, what writer wouldn’t rather be writing than sending out all kinds of silly mail?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>