perm filename EAF.TO[P,JRA] blob sn#171772 filedate 1975-08-05 generic text, type C, neo UTF8
COMMENT āŠ—   VALID 00002 PAGES
C REC  PAGE   DESCRIPTION
C00001 00001
C00002 00002	Hum!!! 
C00005 ENDMK
CāŠ—;
Hum!!! 

I am not to thrilled with the way  things are going with McGraw-Hill;
the  words which first come  to my mind  to express how  I feel about
this whole endeavor  aren't printable.   "appalling",  "discourteous"
"unprofessional" are  mild adjectives  expressing how  I feel  I have
been  treated in this mess.  It was  last December when you said that
McGraw-hill wanted the book.  I have turned down  another contract to
sign with  McGraw; I have not looked  elsewhere for another publisher
because of periodic assurance that everything was "ok". It is now two
months  after I  was  informed  that the  contract  was "soon  to  be
signed".   I  now get  a  letter saying  that McGraw-Hill  wants more
reviews to make "an accurate assessment of my proposal", and wants to
wait for the  revised manuscript before doing so.   What's been going
on for the last seven months? 

Well  two months ago I said that if  the contract wasn't ready for me
by July 1, I'd go elsewhere. That's where things stand  as far as I'm
concerned.   When the  revised version  is finished  it's up  for any
publisher who wants it.  If you want  to send me  a contract to  sign
between now and then, o.k.; otherwise I'll inform you when the latest
version is ready. I find this whole mess absolutely incredible. 

				John Allen