I disagree - consider real estate agents: the buyer's and the seller's take home a total of 6% of the purchase price. If you were an agent, would you settle for, say, 300k, and take your 9k in your pocket, or would you fight a great fight to get to 310k? Commissions should be, in this example, zero until 270k, and then a big chunk of anything above that, to really incentivize the agent to do your best interest.
Same for book agents. I self published two books for this reason.
To be clear, I'm not saying that agents are ALWAYS bad. I am only saying that commissions are not designed to serve the author's best interest.
back
1 comments
It's a different kind of relationship.
Estate agents have many one off customers. Literary agents have many long-term repeat customers. It's worth their while to make them as money as possible and accelerate their career.
I admit it's a small sample - but the authors I know have made considerably more money post-agent than they did pre-. Which matches what cstross mentioned in his post.