Writers with agents

That's not an unreasonable question. But most people in the print business could never afford an agent, unless they're writing a book. It wouldn't make sense to pay 15 percent of whatever you'd get to an agent, unless that agent got you big, big bucks.
I don't think even Wilbon or Mariotti hired agents until they started marketing themselves as multi-media stars. And that didn't happen until ESPN realized it made sense to hire reporters/writers from newspapers, rather than clog the airwaves with pretty faces.

 

As 21 & Gingerbread said, f you're writing a book, you need an agent; otherwise, the chances of you getting published are about 1 in a trillion.

If you're a sports writer covering a beat, there's no reason to have one.

Agents take you on because they see you as a revenue stream.

That's simplistic but true.

 

Apart from book agents, you will need an agent when the the big dogs - SI, ESPN, Yahoo, etc., come calling, and/or if you have morphed into your own brand and begin to do high profile TV a/o radio gigs. Once you are in that kind of competitive situation, with several acronyms all wanting your services, and you are earning upwards of $100,000/yr, that's when an agent becomes necessary.

Signing a contract with one of the acronyms for either print or broadcast without involving an agent is asking to be abused.

 

If you're John Feinstein you need an agent, but for every Feinstein there are probably 1,000 guys/gals who write books that aren't going to sell hundreds of thousands of copies.

I'm not convinced you need an agent for a niche book that will sell modestly. If you can afford one, great, but the publishing house isn't going to roll over for your agent if they expect to sell 10,000 copies of your book.

As for an agent at ESPN/SI/Yahoo, having an agent might help you sign a better deal in the first place. It will not, however, keep you from being abused.


My $.02. YMMV, etc.

 

This works if you're already connected to a publisher; otherwise, it's hard to make those introductions without someone who already knows the right people. An agent isn't going to get you some whopping payday if there's none to be had, but you'll probably be able to get some of the bells and whistles and better protection if an agent looks at your contract.

I would guess most writers have no idea what to ask for, what's standard, what other people are getting, without help from an agent or entertainment lawyer who knows the ropes. There have been a lot of quirky deals cooked up over the last few years, as the web and networks troll for talent; better to know what the other guys are getting before you agree to anything.

As for the abuse, well, we can't control it, we can only hope to contain it.

 

I am not a big enough deal to have an agent, but I know people who are. One thing I'll throw in -- we're always mentioning anytime a print person goes to ESPN.com, which has happened a lot this year. I'd say that's an agent situation, or at least a lawyer situation. I understand that they don't just hire you into perpetuity, you normally get a 3-year contract. I would want that sucker to be airtight, if I'm taking that kind of leap.

 

Two things:

1. "If I'm taking that kind of leap."

What kind of leap are you speaking of?

From a newspaper industry that's hemorrhaging jobs in record numbers and at most places offers at-will employment where you can be fired anytime for any reason to a place where you have a legally binding contract that defines and stipulates specific duties performed vs. renumeration?

Or do you simply believe that any leap from print to electronic journalism is by definition a risky move?

2. "I would want that sucker to be airtight." Yes, you would. But the airtightness will be on the side of the employer more often than not. What an agent sometimes can negotiate for you upfront is a better deal if the job doesn't work out.

 

I'm wondering if there might be some sportswriters who don't need agents but have them anyway. Y'know, we cross paths with a lot of agents for athletes and coaches, and I can't help wondering if someone has ever enlisted an agent's help/advice/ideas when it came time for the scribe to do a radio/TV deal, or sign one of those dot.com contracts.

Might not be ethically cool to use someone who you cover, or whose clients you cover, but it wouldn't surprise me if it happened. A lot of agents are pretty friendly, to the point where you can kind of drop your professional guard.

 

When you arrive at the point in your career when you really need an agent, an agent will generally find you.

 

Does ESPN work with the agents or the "talent" (those pesky, quirky quote marks again) when negotiating contracts?

I was told 3-4 years ago the WWL does not care for agents and dealt directly with the talent. That never made sense to me, though, because of they money they throw around. Looks like an agent or at least an attorney would be a good buffer.

 

I've seen it done with and without agents.

 

I concede your point about the industry, none of us knows if there will be any jobs in three years, but I tend to think of my situation this way, perhaps just to keep from dissolving into a puddle of anxiety: I work at a union shop, I have a lot of seniority, and I think I do a good job on a very high profile beat. So I think (hope) there will be a lot of people to go through before they get to me. Whereas, you could look at a three-year contract in terms of, no job three years from now, period.