EQ 9/17/18 (2nd/final requery Venom)
ER 11/14/18 (Passed--real selective, can't consider it)

KDword, I think you're supposed to send the full ms and not two chapters.

Sent query and first two chapters on November 10.

EQ: 9/15/2018 (Literary fiction) 109K
ER: 10/17/2018 (form)

EQ: 7/30
ER: 9/26, form
Literary fiction, 90K

I sent the synopsis and the full manuscript. +1 to everyone else who thinks the guidelines on the website were confusing! The rejection letter said, "on the basis of your query, we’re afraid we can’t consider your work" -- which does sort of indicate that they only want a query at first. But also, this shows that they aren't auto-deleting emails with attachments, if that helps anyone!

EQ: 8/24/2018
ER: 9/26/2018 (form letter)

EQ: 6/23/18
ER: 8/20/18

Literary fiction, 55K

EQ: 5/19
ER: 8/7

Form rejection, same as others below.

Queried via E mail with synopsis May 17, 2015
Full request June 9
E mail rejection (non-formulaic but quick and supportive) six days later
They seem very professional, my dream agent.

4/22/18 EQ + full ms. docx format per submission instructions. (NO mention of request necessary on QT or their website)
6/26/18 ER form

@rejectionsurvivalist - I've seen that before too I think, lol. I guess we can assume 5-10 pages when they don't say how many, but if they actually want a chapter or two, it's like we're setting ourselves up for instant rejection lol. I don't get why they can't just specify, it's not like it would cost them so much time and money out of their day.

Does anyone know if you after a rejection from one agent (Nicole Aragi), if it's ok to submit to a different agent at the agency?

@LightoBeauty my suspicion is that they're signing so few new authors that they're not paying much attention to the submission process and don't particularly care whether their guidelines are clear... this is far from the worst, last week I decided not to submit to an agency at the last minute because they asked for "sample pages" but didn't specify how many!

I'm glad it wasn't just me who was confused by their submission guidelines. You'd think by now they would have made their guidelines clearer, but then again it's not just them, it amazes me how so many of these agencies don't update their website esp when so many writers say how confusing their guidelines are, I mean, why not just correct that?

Just sent a query with the full MS attached despite the confusion here. I figure if they felt strongly about having the full MS attached to the query, they would have realized that their submission guidelines were too vague and fixed them a long time ago.

Frankly, I've always thought the traditional process of querying and requesting partials or fulls is a waste of time in the digital age. Why not have authors attach the full MS with the query? If the agent doesn't like the query, she doesn't have to read the attachment. If she does like it, she can read some or all of the attached manuscript right away without waiting for a back-and-forth with the author. (Partials make even less sense to me.) The only reason I can see for not wanting people to send a full MS with the query is the amount of storage space in one's inbox, but it's not like several-hundred page Word documents are huge files...

When I see manuscript submission instructions, I always assume they pertain only to people who have received a manuscript request. I've seen other agency sites where they indicate both query and manuscript submission guidelines, but they usually make it clearer that one set of guidelines is for queries and one is for the event that you get a request. I think the Aragi website is unclear and makes it sound like manuscript submission is part of the initial query process, even though it's not. They should definitely make this clearer. Submitting queries is nerve wracking enough already.