Best rational explanation I've read about comps. "Vibes" might still equate to gut-feel divinations, but at least you mentioned POS and other data. Still a struggle to see how genre breakers make it into acquisition (="super-vibes"?) but at least it's a solid grounding on trying to get it right.
In the admittedly very niche field of European royal history (Romanovs, Bonapartes, Queen Victoria's family, etc.), one of the frustrations for authors and resders in recent years has been the unwillingness of agents and editors to take a risk on almost anything remotely out of the box. Established authors, successful in the field, have great ideas for a biography of an overlooked figure or a new angle on something, but instead we just get the gazillionth book on Queen Victoria or Anastasia and her sisters or Edward VIII that offers nothing new.
Same in other historical periods: All those redundant Tudor books and pointless Lincoln and Churchill biographies when we are already blessed with excellent ones in abundance, and historians querying ideas that get rejected for being too risky. I guess it's sound business but as both a reader and potential writer I wish industry pros would be a little bolder sometimes in the historical non-fiction space.
I have a few thoughts about this. 1. Yes, publishing should get out of its own ruts. I totally agree. But 2. the fastest way to turn off a reader is to tell them they SHOULD read something or be interested in a topic. Then it feels like homework. It may be that your work, or work like this, is best suited for academic publishing. That's not a demotion! UPs are amazing. If you want to reach a broader audience, well, show 'em what you got! Why are your subjects more interesting than the ones we already know? If you've got the goods to for wide appeal--go forth!
Fair point and great advice, but I was actually thinking from the point of view of a reader. My work thus far has only been academic, but I enjoy the popular works, too. I go to conferences and hear that X wants to follow up her fantastic biography of Person A with one on Person B, and we all get giddy with excitement, only to find her agent/editor/publisher said no. Sure, the 50 people at the conference are among the 50 people in the world most likely to buy the book, but maybe it's just because we're the only ones who know this amazing story and that X is the perfect person to tell it? (Also, the three books X wrote instead were all very nice but OMG I can't tell you how much I want to read her biography of Person B someday! And there are multiple examples. )
Oh, sweet mystery of life, at last I found you. (It's pronounced 'Fronkensteen!') Thank you for this thorough insight. Having an agent's perspective definitely helps temper my over-thinky-thinkiness when it comes to this weighty aspect--the number of 'educational references' that make comp choice do-or-die is terrifying indeed!
So glad I caught this post. Very helpful to receive a more detailed explanation of comps. I’m writing a non fiction and my first research was lackluster. I need to go talk to people.
I've always felt like when I comp my title to my friends, it's super vibes based, and I've been struggling to figure out the best way to incorporate current titles/authors that are similar, but not exactly what I'm writing. But this was really helpful and is making me feel less stressed about the process overall. Like yes, I can use vibes! And also need the other things, but I love vibes. I read books off of vibes half the time, so this was really helpful!
Aim for published 3-5 years ago. If you have a really good one that's 2 or 6 years ago, that's ok, but books that haven't come out yet and books that came out 15 years ago aren't that helpful.
Hi Kate! Thanks for this! It breaks things down in a really easily and accessible way; however, there’s some hugely conflicting advice that authors are getting on correct comp titles for querying. What I’ve heard from a number of sources (Janet Reid included) is that your comps must check off ALL these boxes. 1. Must be a debut. 2. BOOKS only, written in the last three years. 3. Must be mid-list (not successful outliers, not flops). 4. Must be in your genre.
I did a MSWL query course once where the agents said ONE comp title could be a more well-known title (not an outlier) that is outside the genre and not a debut if the other comp you’re using in your query is and also published in the last three years.
And honestly, finding comps that check off all these boxes is exhausting and has felt impossible. Do you have any comments on this?
Janet Reid is a superstar. I always trust her. I do not always trust advice that says things HAVE to be a certain way, especially something that HAS to be multiple criteria. I mean, your ms HAS to be typed and email-able. There are probably a couple more obvious things I could say your stuff HAS to be. But I've never heard that your comp MUST be a debut. Not once. I believe you someone said that! But in all things publishing, I think you just do the best you can, comps included. Every agent has different advice. None of us are 100% right or wrong, me included.
I loved this article! I host a monthly podcast and reading series called Comp Title Book Club here on Substack, and admittedly, my guests' choices of comp titles have mostly been vibes. (Lovely vibes, but vibes, not POS or BISAC data, nonetheless.)
Would you ever be interested in coming on an episode/doing an interview to discuss this further? I'd be honored to host you.
Sure! Email me at katemckean@substack.com. Full disclosure though--I don't have access to the magical numbers portal, so I can't bring that specific thing to the show!
That's all right! Also, apologies for my delayed response. I'll email you no later than EOB tomorrow to discuss this further. Thank you for your interest.
I was listening to an interview with a well-regarded editor yesterday and he referred to them as competitive titles (he was talking about nonfiction) but it really freaked me out because I thought I’d had it wrong all this time. Have you ever heard or thought of them as competition, and is that helpful?
Yeah, I use both terms interchangeably. Comparable titles. Competitive titles. It's all the same. Some books will be directly competitive with yours and vice versa! But it's a wide field, not a head to head match.
Helpful for pitching, but as an author I want to break new grounds. So, this comp business makes my hair stand on end. I'd rather meet my maker as Frankenstein. Now, imagine what the comps might have been for Shelley's title!
You can break new ground yourself and still align with a previous reading experience. Jaws and Saw are two different horror movies but fans of one might be fans of another!
Best rational explanation I've read about comps. "Vibes" might still equate to gut-feel divinations, but at least you mentioned POS and other data. Still a struggle to see how genre breakers make it into acquisition (="super-vibes"?) but at least it's a solid grounding on trying to get it right.
In the admittedly very niche field of European royal history (Romanovs, Bonapartes, Queen Victoria's family, etc.), one of the frustrations for authors and resders in recent years has been the unwillingness of agents and editors to take a risk on almost anything remotely out of the box. Established authors, successful in the field, have great ideas for a biography of an overlooked figure or a new angle on something, but instead we just get the gazillionth book on Queen Victoria or Anastasia and her sisters or Edward VIII that offers nothing new.
Same in other historical periods: All those redundant Tudor books and pointless Lincoln and Churchill biographies when we are already blessed with excellent ones in abundance, and historians querying ideas that get rejected for being too risky. I guess it's sound business but as both a reader and potential writer I wish industry pros would be a little bolder sometimes in the historical non-fiction space.
I have a few thoughts about this. 1. Yes, publishing should get out of its own ruts. I totally agree. But 2. the fastest way to turn off a reader is to tell them they SHOULD read something or be interested in a topic. Then it feels like homework. It may be that your work, or work like this, is best suited for academic publishing. That's not a demotion! UPs are amazing. If you want to reach a broader audience, well, show 'em what you got! Why are your subjects more interesting than the ones we already know? If you've got the goods to for wide appeal--go forth!
Fair point and great advice, but I was actually thinking from the point of view of a reader. My work thus far has only been academic, but I enjoy the popular works, too. I go to conferences and hear that X wants to follow up her fantastic biography of Person A with one on Person B, and we all get giddy with excitement, only to find her agent/editor/publisher said no. Sure, the 50 people at the conference are among the 50 people in the world most likely to buy the book, but maybe it's just because we're the only ones who know this amazing story and that X is the perfect person to tell it? (Also, the three books X wrote instead were all very nice but OMG I can't tell you how much I want to read her biography of Person B someday! And there are multiple examples. )
Sorry. That was kind of a rant rather than a constructive comment. Feel free to remove.
A welcome and justifiable rant. I see what you mean!
Oh, sweet mystery of life, at last I found you. (It's pronounced 'Fronkensteen!') Thank you for this thorough insight. Having an agent's perspective definitely helps temper my over-thinky-thinkiness when it comes to this weighty aspect--the number of 'educational references' that make comp choice do-or-die is terrifying indeed!
Oh I see what you did there!
oh great, homework.
Thank you for the tips!
So glad I caught this post. Very helpful to receive a more detailed explanation of comps. I’m writing a non fiction and my first research was lackluster. I need to go talk to people.
I've always felt like when I comp my title to my friends, it's super vibes based, and I've been struggling to figure out the best way to incorporate current titles/authors that are similar, but not exactly what I'm writing. But this was really helpful and is making me feel less stressed about the process overall. Like yes, I can use vibes! And also need the other things, but I love vibes. I read books off of vibes half the time, so this was really helpful!
I was told that my comps had to be current. How current? Thanks!
Aim for published 3-5 years ago. If you have a really good one that's 2 or 6 years ago, that's ok, but books that haven't come out yet and books that came out 15 years ago aren't that helpful.
Hi Kate! Thanks for this! It breaks things down in a really easily and accessible way; however, there’s some hugely conflicting advice that authors are getting on correct comp titles for querying. What I’ve heard from a number of sources (Janet Reid included) is that your comps must check off ALL these boxes. 1. Must be a debut. 2. BOOKS only, written in the last three years. 3. Must be mid-list (not successful outliers, not flops). 4. Must be in your genre.
I did a MSWL query course once where the agents said ONE comp title could be a more well-known title (not an outlier) that is outside the genre and not a debut if the other comp you’re using in your query is and also published in the last three years.
And honestly, finding comps that check off all these boxes is exhausting and has felt impossible. Do you have any comments on this?
Janet Reid is a superstar. I always trust her. I do not always trust advice that says things HAVE to be a certain way, especially something that HAS to be multiple criteria. I mean, your ms HAS to be typed and email-able. There are probably a couple more obvious things I could say your stuff HAS to be. But I've never heard that your comp MUST be a debut. Not once. I believe you someone said that! But in all things publishing, I think you just do the best you can, comps included. Every agent has different advice. None of us are 100% right or wrong, me included.
Thanks for this. I will continue to try my best!
I loved this article! I host a monthly podcast and reading series called Comp Title Book Club here on Substack, and admittedly, my guests' choices of comp titles have mostly been vibes. (Lovely vibes, but vibes, not POS or BISAC data, nonetheless.)
Would you ever be interested in coming on an episode/doing an interview to discuss this further? I'd be honored to host you.
Sure! Email me at katemckean@substack.com. Full disclosure though--I don't have access to the magical numbers portal, so I can't bring that specific thing to the show!
That's all right! Also, apologies for my delayed response. I'll email you no later than EOB tomorrow to discuss this further. Thank you for your interest.
So helpful!
Annihilation meets Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas, but set in the Toronto airport at Christmas.
Or is that too crazy sounding? And I should save the setting for elsewhere?
Sounds good to me!
Awesome explanation… best Venn diagram ever.
I was listening to an interview with a well-regarded editor yesterday and he referred to them as competitive titles (he was talking about nonfiction) but it really freaked me out because I thought I’d had it wrong all this time. Have you ever heard or thought of them as competition, and is that helpful?
Yeah, I use both terms interchangeably. Comparable titles. Competitive titles. It's all the same. Some books will be directly competitive with yours and vice versa! But it's a wide field, not a head to head match.
Good to know. Thanks for clarifying.
Helpful for pitching, but as an author I want to break new grounds. So, this comp business makes my hair stand on end. I'd rather meet my maker as Frankenstein. Now, imagine what the comps might have been for Shelley's title!
You can break new ground yourself and still align with a previous reading experience. Jaws and Saw are two different horror movies but fans of one might be fans of another!
Really helpful, thank you!