[neilmarr]

Sound thinking, Richard (as always). My point, though, is that if an author's work is as good as s/he thinks it is, it may well be picked up by an agent and/or publisher and solid editorial input would be part of the deal.

If work does not find a good home after trying everywhere possible, then the author must think again: Should s/he go the extra mile and buy in professional help, or do rejections suggest that perhaps s/he should completely self-reviise, re-title, re-submit, write another book, or merely press an upload key and offer the raw ms free or for $0.99 at a self-publishing retail outlet with no editorial intervention or selection process in place (no shortage of them)?

Of course, we realise that some promising manuscripts must be overlooked by the notorious gatekeepers, but if an author is sure of the quality of a work and cannot afford freelance help, s/he should plug away with submitting: that costs nothing but diligent research and time these days, and there's a whole bunch of credible alternatives to the Big Five.

Although a single submission might become part of the sad end of one, two or two dozen publishers'/agencies' grim rejection statistics, like roulette, you have a new chance at each spin of the wheel ... and you get to use the same chip. Harry Potter was rejected seventeen times before being picked up. Result? 100% success on the eighteenth spin of the wheel. Nothing lost, everything gained.

And if s/he isn't sure, then the book should not be inflicted on innocent readers. Even if they get the book free, they will be expected to invest several precious recreational reading hours in it.

Very best. Neil