QueryTracker Community
November 19, 2018, 05:36:33 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News:
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register  
Note: This forum uses different usernames and passwords than those of the main QueryTracker site. 
Please register if you want to post messages.

This forum is also accessible by the public (including search engines).
Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Curious about a pattern I have seen  (Read 361 times)
Catharina S
Newbie
*

Karma: 1
Offline Offline

Posts: 11


« on: October 13, 2018, 03:41:05 AM »

I have a list of agents who I would like to query and periodically I will check their timelines to see what sorts of manuscripts they request, how often they respond, etc. There is one agent on my list who has an incredible response time. Of course, most of the responses are rejections, though this agent has made several requests for full. Most responses from this agent have been sent within a few days.

In among the responses, however, I notice every now and again there are queries which have not received a response, which stand out because every other query submitted in the same time frame has either been rejected or received a request for a full.

I know there are a lot of reasons why there may be no recorded responses (the author never returned to record the response, the query got lost  eek), but I wonder if agents pull certain queries and lay them aside for further consideration? Is that something that happens?
Logged
Rachael846
Sr. Member
****

Karma: 28
Offline Offline

Posts: 110


« Reply #1 on: October 13, 2018, 07:34:37 AM »

Yes, that does happen sometimes. That happened to me with the agent who is now my agent. She set my query aside to reread the pages later when she was in a better mood so she could look at it with fresh eyes.

My bet most of the time though is people just don't come back to record it, like you said.
Logged
eleonora
Newbie
*

Karma: 2
Offline Offline

Posts: 17


« Reply #2 on: October 13, 2018, 10:58:40 PM »

That, and note that sometimes writers don't pay attention to how queries get read. If an agent is one who records queries read on their blog or website, for example, or note that they will respond only if they read positively, then comments like this may be off-the-mark due to the writer's ignorance v. any decision made on the agent's behalf. Take what look like "mistakes" or "boo-boos" on an agent's behalf with a grain of salt, IF there otherwise is a clear track record of response and generosity.
Logged
Sprinkledcone
Newbie
*

Karma: 1
Offline Offline

Posts: 9



« Reply #3 on: November 08, 2018, 10:10:49 AM »

It's frustrating to be the writer whose query was skipped in line. Am totally there with a good agent from a very good agency...many of the queries before and after mine have been responded to. For me...crickets.
Logged
jessikalindst
Jr. Member
**

Karma: 3
Offline Offline

Posts: 42


Holy Frijoles Batman!!


« Reply #4 on: November 08, 2018, 12:48:07 PM »

As everyone has said, yes. Though if queries do get lost, in some agencies' guidelines they'll invite authors to query again, which is nice because sometimes things happen.
I've also read a couple times that a lot of agents don't read queries in the order they came, so it's just one of those things that varies.
Logged
koji
Hero Member
*****

Karma: 46
Offline Offline

Posts: 207


« Reply #5 on: November 08, 2018, 01:55:37 PM »

Down this path leads madness. Honestly, there are too many moving parts to get a good guess of what happened. Maybe the person wrote an offensive query. Maybe they pulled it aside to read. Maybe it got lost. Maybe the person wrote to check up on it, bumping it out of line. Maybe the answer went to the writer's spam folder. Maybe, maybe, maybe...

QueryTracker is amazing for looking at trends. But when you try to pinpoint exacts, there's only madness.
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.2 | SMF © 2006-2007, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!