Help navigation
News
-
RELATED STORIES
-
Pushkin signs The Fishermen for ONE
Pushkin Press' new impr...
-
Bertelsmann sees group profit rise in first quarter
Random House parent Bertels...
-
Amazon's 2012 tax bill revealed
Amazon.co.uk paid £3....
-
Ed Victor in link-up with United Agents
The Ed Victor literary agen...
-
Kepler, Bonnier launch agency
Swedish husband-and-wife cr...
Agents look for turning point as profits take a tumble
01.01.70 | Catherine Neilan
Literary agents have seen their profits tumble, with the recession, dwindling advances and publishers' focus on celebrity cited as contributing factors. The split at PFD, which led to the creation of United Agents (UA), also hampered the performance of the two agencies involved, while an expansion in staffing costs affected both Curtis Brown and Aitken Alexander.
The largest loss was incurred by UA, which in its start-up year to end-2008 made a loss of £2m on sales of £6m. According to Simon Trewin, UA's head of books, "Such a loss always formed part of the financing plan" for the creation of UA. "As we become more established we have fewer obligations connected to a start-up. Specifically, the resolution of the circumstances of our start-up involved a heavy one-off professional services bill."
Trewin dismissed concern expressed by the firm's auditor that the agency was reliant on "the continued support" of its banks to continue trading, stressing the comments, made on its accounts, were "quite standard especially for newly set-up companies". He added UA had undertaken the repayment of its bank loan "as per [the bank's] financing plan".
PFD fared little better in 2008, a period in which it lost some 80 people, many of whom joined UA, and was subject to a management buyout. Though it does not submit full accounts, it appears to have made a loss close to £1m.
Caroline Michel, chief executive, said the year was "not representative" of the agency going forward. "We lost half our business [in 2007], so we have built the company back since," she said. "And for 2009, we have had a year of stability and profit which, given the state of the market in all sectors, is a terrific achievement on behalf of everyone here."
Over the same period abbreviated accounts submitted by Sheil Land showed it made a loss close to £75,000, while A P Watt made a profit just shy of £250,000.
More recent results filed by Curtis Brown show that it made a loss of £13,710 over the year to end-February 2009, compared with a profit of nearly £200,000 previously. The company's turnover increased by more than £430,000 to £5.8m, but there was also an increase in staff costs of nearly £600,000 with staff numbers up from 61 to 70. Aitken Alexander made a profit of £62,000, less than in its previous year, a performance which joint m.d. Clare Alexander said came as a result of hiring three new agents and opening a small office in New York.
But Alexander also blamed the downturn on the medium-term trend of publishers eschewing literary authors for celebrities: "Publishers' focus has been on celebrities, and most agents play very little, if any, role in that," she said. "I think we are at a turning point now. The search for good writing is still on in most of the world, and in some of England too."
Michel said she also recognised the factors cited by Alexander, but said PFD was now "building brands where we couldn't before" across a variety of all media. "There has never been more opportunity than there is now," she added.
Note
This article has been amended. Aitken Alexander registered a post-tax profit of £62,000 in the financial year ended 31/3/2009, and not as reported a loss of £850,000 in the original version of this news report.
The purported £850,000 loss was based upon an inappropriate reading of the accumulated profits of the company, as registered on the balance sheet of Aitken Alexander's abbreviated accounts, which were adjusted between 1/4/2008 and 1/4/2009, and which in fact have no bearing on the operating profit or loss of the company.
Furthermore, Clare Alexander's comments in the same news report, regarding the agency's expanded operations, were intended to explain its relatively low profits for the last financial year (the agency has traditionally made a profit of no less than 20% of turnover).
The Bookseller extends it apologies to Aitken Alexander and is sorry for any confusion caused.



Comments: Scroll down for the latest comments and to have your say
By posting on this website you agree to the Bookseller comments policy. Comments go direct to live please be relevant, brief and definitely not abusive. Report any "unsuitable comments by clicking the links"
Sort: Oldest first | Newest first | Readers' most recommended
Right on Ed. Publishing - home of the creepy middle class who know the price of everything and the value of nothing. Bereft of wonder and soul, awash with dosh, property and 1.8 children. Pace Larkin they are f****d up but they are the last and least likely to realise it (especially while daddy still provides). Attracted to the genteel world of publishing like moths to a flame, unfortunately without the same likely denouement (in the short term anyway).
Mike, you're right. Everyone working in publishing is 'awash with dosh'. Everyone. You should try it.
Mike, you are attacking a straw man that no longer exists. You also come across as a pretentious twat.
Mike: You've touched a nerve with "Commissioning Editor" anyway - well done. Shame he doesn't self-edit his posts for language.
Thank you Commissioning Editor. I am not middle class, I have a very ordinary name, and thanks to the low pay in this industry I am sinking further into the depths of my overdraft by the day.
You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. You base your criticism on unfounded ideas, and I think it's sad that you have so little grip on reality.
Only a fool sees people as types - whether by class, race, gender or otherwise. Personally I'm middle class, have a lot more wonder and soul than I have money or property, and don't have kids. Off you go, Mike.
Deep: You know, everywhere I go I see "types" be it male/female, rich/poor, caucasian/non-caucasion, etc etc. and within those types there are sub-types. If out of ludicrous pc hypnosis you refuse to recognise there is such a thing or that such classification is sometimes useful even necessary, you are not going to be able to discuss anything, let alone do anything. I think Mike is defining middle class for his argument as those who are "..bereft of wonder and soul, awash with dosh, property and 1.8 children". Don't exist?... I think that's denial. You're not awash with dosh, bereft of soul and have no kids yet you work in publishing? Fine, you are not the picture that everyone has, rightly or wrongly, of publishing. At the very least the industry has a PR problem. Alternatively it has a major systemic issue. Take you pick.
Amazing, I thought it would be the editorial 'types' who would be full of pretentiousness, but apparently not.
Of course 'middle class' types exist, whether or not they were born into dosh. Pretence is an amazing thing! But to tar everybody in our industry with the yuppy brush is completely unfair, and has no basis in fact whatsoever.
Generalisations are dangerous, and I believe they are indicative of a lack of intellect, and a lack of understanding of the real world.
There is nothing pretentious about being an 'editorial type' - it means we're interested in people, ideas and reality!
Editorial Assistant, London: Your enthusiasm is infectious! Clearly you are the better side of the industry. Now we've only got to identify the really pretentious i.e. all the time-servers, faces, sycophants and other vain darlings of the literary luncheon clubs, otherwise known as publishing.
'At the very least the industry has a PR problem. Alternatively it has a major systemic issue. '
Oh come along, show me an industry that doesn't have one or the other. Plenty have both.
Oh dear the lazy middle men/women of the so-called publishing industry have dined out (with their friends not their authors) a little too much. Well here
Oh dear the lazy middle men/women of the so-called publishing industry have dined out (with their friends not their authors) a little too much. Well here
Right on Ed. Publishing - home of the creepy middle class who know the price of everything and the value of nothing. Bereft of wonder and soul, awash with dosh, property and 1.8 children. Pace Larkin they are f****d up but they are the last and least likely to realise it (especially while daddy still provides). Attracted to the genteel world of publishing like moths to a flame, unfortunately without the same likely denouement (in the short term anyway).
Mike, you're right. Everyone working in publishing is 'awash with dosh'. Everyone. You should try it.
Mike, you are attacking a straw man that no longer exists. You also come across as a pretentious twat.
Mike: You've touched a nerve with "Commissioning Editor" anyway - well done. Shame he doesn't self-edit his posts for language.
Thank you Commissioning Editor. I am not middle class, I have a very ordinary name, and thanks to the low pay in this industry I am sinking further into the depths of my overdraft by the day.
You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. You base your criticism on unfounded ideas, and I think it's sad that you have so little grip on reality.
Only a fool sees people as types - whether by class, race, gender or otherwise. Personally I'm middle class, have a lot more wonder and soul than I have money or property, and don't have kids. Off you go, Mike.
Deep: You know, everywhere I go I see "types" be it male/female, rich/poor, caucasian/non-caucasion, etc etc. and within those types there are sub-types. If out of ludicrous pc hypnosis you refuse to recognise there is such a thing or that such classification is sometimes useful even necessary, you are not going to be able to discuss anything, let alone do anything. I think Mike is defining middle class for his argument as those who are "..bereft of wonder and soul, awash with dosh, property and 1.8 children". Don't exist?... I think that's denial. You're not awash with dosh, bereft of soul and have no kids yet you work in publishing? Fine, you are not the picture that everyone has, rightly or wrongly, of publishing. At the very least the industry has a PR problem. Alternatively it has a major systemic issue. Take you pick.
Amazing, I thought it would be the editorial 'types' who would be full of pretentiousness, but apparently not.
Of course 'middle class' types exist, whether or not they were born into dosh. Pretence is an amazing thing! But to tar everybody in our industry with the yuppy brush is completely unfair, and has no basis in fact whatsoever.
Generalisations are dangerous, and I believe they are indicative of a lack of intellect, and a lack of understanding of the real world.
There is nothing pretentious about being an 'editorial type' - it means we're interested in people, ideas and reality!
Editorial Assistant, London: Your enthusiasm is infectious! Clearly you are the better side of the industry. Now we've only got to identify the really pretentious i.e. all the time-servers, faces, sycophants and other vain darlings of the literary luncheon clubs, otherwise known as publishing.
'At the very least the industry has a PR problem. Alternatively it has a major systemic issue. '
Oh come along, show me an industry that doesn't have one or the other. Plenty have both.