An interesting take from a supposedly anonymous agent who blogs on the bookseller:

http://www.thebookseller.com/blogs/141761-crossing-the-lines.html

On the plus side, the agency has untapped expertise in their authors, which unpubished writers seem to be willing to pay for - just as Arvon runs courses, hosted by published authors. And more and more writers are going direct to epublishing, bypassing agents and publishing houses entirely, so it's not a foregone conclusion that they'll all expect CB to represent them and find them a publisher at the end of the course. But it could all blow up in their faces if they ever get a particularly beligerant writer on one of their courses who thinks they've paid to bypass the slush pile.

I know quite a few writers who use contract lawyers instead of agents. One way to look at this kind of thing, therefore, is to substitute 'contract lawyer' for 'agent'. So, imagine if a contract lawyer started offering his clients courses in how to write, or how to sing, or how to play tennis. It's not very different from your accountant offering to help you write your new novel. But this is even worse. Here, it's not a contract lawyer/agent offering existing writer clients courses in how to write better (which would be silly enough), it's a contract lawyer offering courses to writers who aren't yet even paid professionals.

We all know the rule that money should flow to the writer, the only exception being when you pay for instruction. But I don't agree that this offer is the same as Arvon (or similar) courses. There, the writer is paying for instruction from people with experience and success in writing, and without commercial interests clouding the arrangement. In other words, you'd pay for guitar lessons from Eric Clapton but only the confused and desperate would pay for guitar lessons from Eric Clapton's agent.

Terry

To be fair to them, Anna Davis the main tutor is both an agent and an author, with apparently 5 novels to her name, and Jake Arnott is the co-tutor.

Then those two should set up a completely separate teaching organisation independent of their agency, and make it clear to writers that there is no connection between the two. But of course, that would mean they'd have to drop their main selling point, which is the promise or hint of a promise that any good author they teach will get a publishing deal via their agency services.

I could get quite angry about this kind of thing. It's similar to manuscript agencies playing heavily on the promise that their services will lead to publication. They should be making it very clear to clients that they are offering a specific service to do with technical assessment of manuscripts, not getting people published.

Terry