Answer by Researcher John (sublime1) on Sun 5 Aug 2007 - 11:32 pm UTC:

dma1966...

There has never been a detailed, official explanation for the closure of
Google Answers, though there has been much speculation by the web
community, but if you put together statements by various Google staff, and
combine that with the experience of the Google Answers Researchers (GARs),
you can surmise the essential truth behind the decision.

The predominant assumption by the web community was that Google Answers
fell prey to the rising success of Yahoo Answers, as reflected in this
representative post, titled, 'Yahoo's Big Win' at TechCrunch:
http://www.techcrunch.com/2006/11/30/yahoos-big-win/

But many people, including GARs, noted that the two services were so
completely different as to defy comparison, ultimately undermining the
popular belief that the rise of Yahoo Answers contributed in any way to the
demise of Google Answers, as expressed in a comment by Folletto Malefico in
response to the article cited above:

"I can’t sto [sic] thinking that Google Answers and Yahoo Answers are two
DIFFERENT services, with different targets and users.

Even if they share their name and there are people answering, the
similarities ends there. One is an expert service where you pay for
reliable and good quality information. The second one is a people service
where you get anything, from the silliest answer to the most detailed one.

To me, it’s like comparing Wikipedia and a forum.

The only problem is that the Google Answers target was unsuccessful. And
that’s all. It’s good to reflect on that, but theres no “big win”
to compare."

For more of the web community's discussion of the theory that Google
Answers' demise was due to Yahoo Answers success, see these search
results:
http://www.google.com/search?q=%22google+answers%22+%22yahoo+answers%22


The "official" statements released by Google Answers and the staff who
worked on it seem to confirm the idea that the closure was unrelated to
Yahoo Answers, and that it was simply a very early experimental product
which ultimately wasn't as successful, in their view, as a Google product
should be, and which didn't fit in with their evolving focus on other
priorities.

The Google Answers FAQs page has now been modified to note:
"Google Answers was an experimental product for users to get help from
Researchers with expertise in online searching."
http://answers.google.com/answers/faq.html

A post about the closure, by the software developers behind Google Answers,
on The Official Google Blog, noted:
"Google is a company fueled by innovation, which to us means trying lots of
new things all the time -- and sometimes it means reconsidering our goals
for a product. Later this week, we will stop accepting new questions in
Google Answers, the very first project we worked on here. The project
started with a rough idea from Larry Page, and a small 4-person team turned
it into reality in less than 4 months. For two new grads, it was a crash
course in building a scalable product, responding to customer requests, and
discovering what questions are on people's minds."

More on the page:
http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2006/11/adieu-to-google-answers.html


Of course, for the GARs, and the customers of Google Answers who used the
service regularly, the project seemed successful to the extent that many
Researchers were earning a living there, or at least adequately
supplementing their income sufficiently to continue answering questions.
And customers continued to seem happy with the answers, providing high
ratings and tips.

Nonetheless, the site did not generate the kind of traffic and profit one
might reasonably expect from a typical, successful Google product, at least
from a corporate viewpoint. 

The GARs who remained until the end, and put up with the failed email
notification system (which was supposed to notify customers of activity on
their questions, but stopped doing so), and who watched with disbelief when
Google took their primary link for Google Answers off of their list of
'More' services, felt that Google Answers might fail simply because it was
not only not being promoted and well-maintained, but the opposite seemed to
be occurring. Repairs to the system were slower in coming, if they were
made at all. Communication between GARs and Google Answers administrators
dropped off as newsletters decreased in frequency and responses to email
consisted increasingly of only canned replies. 

So, in the long run, it seemed clear to the GARs that Google Answers failed
precisely because it was increasingly a non-priority for those who had
developed it, and they were putting their attention elsewhere. It seemed
that it was no longer the shiny, new experiment of two new and excited
software engineers, but a now-familiar distraction from new and different
projects, which simply wasn't worth the time and effort to repair or
maintain.


This perspective seems to be supported by statements made by other staffers
about Google in general, as in the comments by Marissa Mayer,
vice-president for search products and user experience, in this article in
Business week, who:

"...estimates that up to 60% to 80% of Google's products may eventually
crash and burn. But the idea, she says, is to encourage risk-taking and let
surviving products truly thrive. 'We anticipate that we're going to throw
out a lot of products,' says Mayer. 'But [people] will remember the ones
that really matter and the ones that have a lot of user potential.'"

More on the page:
http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/06_28/b3992051.htm


There are currently 43 former Google Answers Researchers registered at
Uclue. And realistically, that represents most, if not all, of the
Researchers who remained active to the end of Google Answers. 

I hope that more than satisfies your interests in asking this question. If
anything is unclear, please post a Request for Clarification and I'll be
happy to respond.

sublime1