Hi Ashlinn,

You're right about cutting costs. No slur there at all. The fact is every submission that reaches MNW is assessed. That does not mean that they will read every word of every manuscript, I'm afraid. Some submissions are self-rejecting almost immediately. You can tell, for instance, if someone has basic literacy, or knows how to make what they are writing interesting. Let's face it, if the editor reading through the slush pile is bored after page one, the majority of readers are going to be too.

So they make an assessment and then they farm out the ones that seem promising to paid readers. There's an expense. Even on books that they may go on to reject. Sometimes a book will be read by two readers, if the first assessment was borderline or uncertain. The books that get through that stage will then be read by an experienced editor and the publisher, Mike Barnard. They will then confer.

Using e-submissions, with massive screens to make reading and assessing those initial submissions easier for the editors is a way of cutting costs and speeding up the process.

But fundamentally, what is different about Macmillan's approach to the slush pile from other publishers is very simple. They are bothering to read it.

Before MNW their policy was the same as everyone else's. Put the subs straight back in the return envelope unread with a note effectively saying, 'sorry, we don't accept unsolicited manuscripts. Get an agent.'

I would encourage you to sub. My experience has been wholly positive.

Thanks for the clarification, Roger. I wasn't under any illusion that MNW read everything word of what is sent to them, that just wouldn't be possible or sensible. My background is in marketing and I find it very interesting to look at the industry structure and inherent costs. It seems to me that if I were a publisher in this industry I wouldn't farm out the slush pile to agents. To my mind it's too critical an element to success to allow it to be out-sourced as it is now. However, given the numbers of submissions, the cost of managing that pile has to be enormous. It looks to me that MNW has taken back control over their submission process and has taken a creative approach to getting the best out of it while at the same time containing costs as much as possible.

I imagine that it is relatively easy to identify crap in the slush pile but finding the diamonds is a lot harder as many of them will still be in rough, unpolished form.

I'm sure that the turnaround time on an electronic submission is a lot shorter than a hard-copy one. (and as all the best Hollywood movies say 'time is money'.)Most agents don't take electronic submissions out of a fear of being submerged but their attitude is a short-sighted one. Instead of reducing the inflow of their raw material, they need to focus on optimising their selection process both in terms of honing in on the good submissions and speeding up the process to cut costs. When MNW does find a novel that has potential they can react an awful lot faster than with current methods and your experience seems to bear that out.

MNW is questioning the 'norms' of the industry that are costly and obviously don't work and that strikes me as an intelligent way to manage a business. Of course the old guard is going to be critical as is always the case with innovative new thinking in an industry but if I were on the demand side of this particular industry instead of the supply side, that's exactly what I would do.

Ashlinn

Ashlinn, your analysis of MNW is fascinating. There's a new publishing kid on the block - Snowbooks - who seem to be thinking as you are: everything electronic, and quick turnarounds. I'm watching them with interest too.

Emma