Will Google Answers live or die?

Hello executivehotline-ga,

Of course, you realize you're asking a biased group of people about
this.  Anyway, I'm certainly biased.  But I think I have a good
argument that Google Answers will live for the foreseeable future.  (I
say "the foreseeable future", because everything in this world dies
eventually.  It's a sad fact, but true.  As the philosopher said to
the king who asked for a comment appropriate to every situation: All
things must pass.)

First of all, Google Answers is run by Google, a rather profitable
company, even at a time when profitable Web-based companies are hard
to find.

Second, Google Answers has attracted a lot of attention, even though
Google has not yet promoted it to the exent of its main search
services.  (Note: I do not wish to complain about this; heck, I'm
pleased so long as it exists at all!)  Google has not advertised
Google Answers on its home page, except I think for about a week a
number of months ago.  So far as I am aware, it has promoted Google
Answers primarily in search results -- and not all search results. 
Many people initially learned about Google Answers not from Google but
from articles or blogs.  (For example, there was an apparent increase
in questions from Australia after an article in a prominent Australian
newspaper.)  My guess is that only a small fraction of the Web-using
public knows about Google Answers -- and yet there are several dozen
questions posted every day.

Third, it appears that most people who ask questions on Google Answers
are satisfied by the results, and that many decide to return to ask
new questions.  Presumably, some of these people also promote Google
Answers on the Web and/or to people they know.

Fourth, Google Answers has just this week gone out of beta testing --
you may have noticed that the "Beta" is gone from the Google Answers
logo.  At this time, Google Answers started to place advertisements
over the questions -- if anything, more prominently placed than in the
Google Web Search results.

Putting all of these points together, you have a recipe for success. 
It appears that Google can afford to develop Google Answers, and
presumably the movement out of beta testing and the addition of
advertisements indicates that it will do so.  It can experiment with
methods of promoting Google Answers.  Moreover, as with Google Web
Search, people around the world help to promote the service, and many
use the service on multiple occasions.

Occasional dissatisfied customers (or, perish the thought,
dissatisfied Researchers) might conceivably darken the picture.  But
overall, I think the outlook for Google Answers is very good.

- justaskscott-ga

---

Request for Answer Clarification by executivehotline-ga on 10 May 2003 13:09 PDT

Would anyone happen to know what the Google Answer trends look like in
terms of (a) price per question and (b) realization (total $ paid as %
of total $ posted)?

Also, is there any known correlation between size of bounty and asker
satisfaction?

(I have a sense for the volume trend based on the sequential numbering
of inquiries over the past year - assuming the numbering system is
truly sequential.)

---

Clarification of Answer by justaskscott-ga on 10 May 2003 13:30 PDT

I know that some Researchers have been tracking things like that,
though I don't know if anyone has anything like complete numbers. 
I'll mention your request to the other Researchers.

Thank you for the tip and rating.  I still intend to respond to your
comment -- as well as missy's -- in the next day or so.  Both of you
raise some good points, and I thought I might try to raise some
additional points.

Thanks Scott for your call for Comments!

I cannot see any future for google answers

Google Answers will LIVE FOREVER and EVER. Amen.

Because, whatever happens on Earth, the true disciples will carry on as before.

For so has decreed the Pink Goddess,

To Me, Her Humble Scribe.

PB

Regarding justaskscott's answer...

I see his first point as irrelevant. Google throws all kinds of stuff
against the wall to see what sticks, as it should. The company is
profitable in part because it doesn't support non-viable service
offerings. Profitable companies launch and fold spinoff enterprises
all the time. That GA is backed by Google's brand, talent, experience,
and expertise is relevant; that it is backed by a profitable web
company is not.

Re second point, GA's popularity could help or it could hurt. As
volume increases, for example, the quality of the researcher pool
could decline. Questions could get snapped up and locked by
ill-equipped researchers even more than they are now.

The third point is germane. If askers are satisfied for the most part
(as determined, I suppose, by 4 and 5 star ratings), that bodes well.
But ultimately three constituencies have to be happy: askers,
answerers, and Google. (Maybe a fourth - stockholders - but that's for
another day.)

The fourth point is also relevant. The beta test has lasted over a
year and the adjustments in terms of price range, interface, and
protocols have not changed much. That suggests the process is working
well on the whole.

Personally I love the business model. But I think the value skews
heavily toward the asker the way things are set up now. Which is fine
with me as an asker, but concerns me regarding the long-term viability
of the service.

One issue you didn't hit on is that askers sometimes get great,
thoughtful answers and then don't pay. How big a problem is this? What
is this doing to researcher satisfaction or morale?

Why is the upper limit $200? Is that to keep researchers from spending
a lot of time then getting stiffed?

Would asker ratings (like eBay) improve things? Or do researchers
already see something that askers don't see regarding "asker
integrity"? Seems like it would help a researcher to know before
locking the question (a) whether the asker tends to pay, and (b) what
kinds of ratings the asker tends to give.

Also it seems to me (as an overgeneralization) that askers don't value
the skills and time of the answerers, posting lowball bounties and
counting on competition among researchers. Can this really be a
satisfying (not to mention profitable) way for researchers to spend
their time? What are the implications? Will the researcher pool come
to be dominated by hobbyists rather than professional researchers with
niche expertise?

I think Google Answers is a fascinating experiment. I do not agree
with the librarians that GA diminishes what they do, or that
information wants to be free. I think rather that information wants to
become knowledge, and if knowledgeable intermediaries can make that
happen, then they provide a valuable service for which they should be
paid.

Sure, people could learn to find information themselves. I ask
questions sometime that I could answer on my own. But sometimes I
value my time more than my money, and here there are researchers who
are willing to commit their time for my money. And Google takes a
slice for providing a forum. It's beautiful. It's capitalism at its
finest.

I AM INTERESTED IN OTHERS' COMMENTS!!!  WILL GOOGLE ANSWERS LIVE OR
DIE?

I plan to respond to your thoughtful comment in the next couple of
days (perhaps even this evening, if I have some time).  In the
meantime, I'll alert the Researchers to your request for comments. 
The more opinions the merrier!

E-H,

You ask:

"Would asker ratings (like eBay) improve things?"

Let me give you something to chew on with that.  Would you shop
someplace where you, as a customer, were given a rating?

Ratings on eBay serve an important purpose, given that sellers aren't
handed their money (or credit card information) right away.  They lose
money, both in listing fees and the percentage of final bid taken by
eBay, when bidders don't pay.

With Google Answers, that's really not a problem.  You have to give up
your credit card information first, and as soon as you hit the limit
($25), your card is charged.  While there is the occasional refund
request, that's all handled through the office, and the Editors do
also occasionally deny the request.  "Deadbeats" aren't so much a
problem here, and "rating" our customers would only serve to upset
them and drive them away.
 

Yes, it's disappointing when a customer requests a refund, but for the
most part, we look at it as the cost of keeping the customers happy. 
Happy customers come back.  Angry ones not only don't come back, they
tell all their friends how bad you are, and if you really upset them,
they erect webpages detailing just exactly how wretched you are.

You also ask:

"Will Google Answers live or die?" 

How about you, Mr. Seeger?  Will ExecutiveHotline.com live or die?  Is
*your* research service going to croak?  If not, why not? (More to the
point, doesn't it irritate the daylights out of you when people ask
you that, and sneer when you say "It's going to live, of course!"?)

People have been yelling "DOOOOOOOOM!" about Google Answers since the
day we launched.  We were supposed to last a week, two weeks, maybe 6
months at the extreme, most generous estimate.  We were supposed to go
the way of Keen and InfoRocket and any of the dozen other services
that died.

It's a year later.  We're out of Beta.  Question volume is slowly
increasing.  People are becoming ever more aware of us.  I'd say we're
alive and kicking and we're going to stay that way for a good long
while, for a number of reasons:

Recently, a competing service proclaimed that "unlike Google Answers,
we have qualified experts!".  Yeah, they're "qualified" all right -
"life advisors", "fortune tellers", "psychics" - and there are 1700 of
them fighting to get paid $1 each for....*rummage*...13 questions. 
Compare this with the 500 Researchers here (of which about 200 - 300,
at an estimate, are active at any given time) and the large number of
open questions available to us (~900).

The "experts" there aren't screened at all - I signed up with them in
less than 2 minutes, and they didn't check anything.  (No, I don't
answer there.  I just signed up to see how they could claim they had
"qualified experts".)  Here at Google Answers, though, I actually had
to jump through some hoops - an essay detailing my search experience
and areas of interest and expertise, followed by a series of sample
answers.

Already, we've got the leg up on survival, because we *have* been
screened, and Google Answers *doesn't* let just anyone call themselves
a Researcher.  It's true that sometimes people do slip through that
shouldn't be doing this.  But they either improve thanks to the
tutelage of the Researcher Community, or they are dismissed.

We also have protections in place for our customers.  That other
place?  I can't find a single thing that explains in detail what to do
if you don't like your answer.  You pay up front, before anyone
answers, and if they dump a load of malarkey on your lap, you're
apparently stuck with it.  They don't have to be polite to their
customers, and they aren't required to follow up, either.

Contrast this with Google Answers.  If you find an answer lacking, or
you think it needs to be more clear, you can ask your Researcher to
clarify.  You can *keep* asking, and be assured that the Researcher
will work with you to make sure the answer is clear.  Still unhappy
with the answer?  You can ask for a refund and either get your
question re-posted so another Researcher can tackle it, or walk away
with your refund in your pocket - provided your request is reasonable,
of course.  (Most refunds do appear to be granted.)

That's another mark in our favor - we have customer service and answer
quality standards, and measures in place to help satisfy unhappy
customers.

You are correct in that there are a number of questions that are
severely underbid.  I don't think this is so much a matter of
customers not valuing a Researcher's time as it is a matter of
customers not realizing how much time putting together a good answer
actually requires.  There is a perception that you can find
*everything* on the Internet.  While it's true that if you look hard
enough, you can find virtually anything, the fact is, certain queries
require sifting through hundreds of pages to compile disparate bits of
data for a single answer.

There's not one single document available detailing the contact
information for every airport in Europe, for example.  No...wait...I
lie...there is now, because I spent three days creating it from some
500 other pages, because that's what a customer needed.  But do you
see what I mean?  It seems like there *should* be such a directory,
and people don't realize that much of what they want/need doesn't
exist all in one spot until one of us explains why, and what it will
take to get the information.

There is also a perception the Google Answers Researchers are either
super-human or just have access to secret information that no one else
can get.  Flattering as that perception is (because really, who
DOESN'T want to be worshipped as a SuperHero??), it's a difficult
perception to overcome.

I don't believe that low bidders are deliberately trying to slide by
on the cheap.  I believe they either don't realize the amount of work
necessary to give them what they need, or they think we're cosmically
gifted and can find what they want in the blink of an eye.  We do
employ certain methods of correcting these perceptions, and the
customers who don't take the corrections end up answerless.

Will Google Answers live?  Google isn't exactly known for sticking its
name on stink-bombs, so I doubt we would have been brought out of Beta
if we were expected to die.

Google Answers will live - not just because we have a talented and
dedicated Researcher pool made up of authors, scientists, programmers,
artists and even plain old housewives like me, but because our
customers are satisfied and our contractee *believes in us*.

That's really all we need.

--Missy

Google Answers is a wonderful concept. And let me tell you ALL, it is
here to stay. It has a unique involvement cum business model. I am
sure, it will be here.

Cheers All
Ranjit

Missy has said it all perhaps so little I could add( as a fairly
consistent user/ questioner) of any value except this in regards
something you wanted to know; in the early days I went through the
questions to determine average fee paid by each questioner per
question and it came out at $12.25. Someone else did something similar
later on and arrived at a figure not far removed from my  $12.25 also.
At the time neither $2.00 or $200.00 was an option  however with the
then range being $4.00 to $50.00.

 John From Melbourne

I don't have as much time as I had hoped to submit a comment; but
let's see what I can write in several minutes ...

Google's overall profitability helps Google Answers in the long run,
because it does not need to rush to make Google Answers itself
profitable.  Google can allow Google Answers to grow incrementally,
and can take time to evaluate each new aspect of the service.

The quality of the Researcher pool should remain high; Google will
presumably drop a Researcher if he or she disappoints too many
customers.

If Google Answers maintains steady growth, then I think that all
constituencies will be happy.

You are correct that Researchers may be disappointed by the prices of
some questions.  But then, they don't have to answer those questions. 
As question volume rises, the laws of supply and demand should help to
boost the average price per answered question.  That should make the
Researchers happy and keep a good group of Researchers on board.

The upper limit on price seems justifiable; it can prevent either the
customer or the Researcher from being disappointed, depending on the
situation.  Of course, as a Researcher, I'd be happy to receive, say,
$750 for an answer -- but the customer's expectation would likely be
very high, and I wonder how wise it would be to risk a number of days
of research on an answer that might be rejected.  (There are arguments
too for a higher price limit.  All I want to point out is that the
current limit is defensible.)

"Asker ratings" is something that the Researchers can, in effect,
determine already, by searching for the customer's history on Google
Answers' search engine.

I agree that Google Answers and libraries can peacefully co-exist.  If
anything, I think that Google Answers can demonstrate to libraries how
to market themselves to the general public.  Not everyone will want to
or be able to pay for answers, and not every answer will be available
via the Internet.  At some point, everyone who needs information will
need the library to do for them what they might expect Google Answers
(or Google itself) to do.

I agree with almost everything that missy has said.  I think that
there is common ground in each of our views: Google Answers is
designed well, it is interesting, and should be popular.  Whether it
will succeed, we can only speculate.  But as missy explains, in
general Google Answers appears to satisfy Google, the Researchers, and
the customers.  I see no particular reason to believe that Google
Answers will fail, and several reasons why it should succeed,
especially as question volume rises.

People always had and always will have questions searching for
answers.

About 3 billion webpages Google searches, about 3 billion seconds a
person lives in 100 years, to get your information you need Google,
and there are several ways of searching Google: Froogle, Glossary, et
cetera.

To get information tailored to you - you need Google Answers.

So Google Answers will LIVE FOREVER.

It will most certainly live, and will likely thrive as time passes.
Why?
Well, we all know that we live in the "information age". There are
profound implications we need to look at as this age continues to
mature. One likely implication is a need on both micro and macro
levels of society for "quality" information. GA is if anything, a
quality filter. It provides the most relevant information needed, and
in a timely manner. It appears to me that the very nature of this
service will become an increasingly neccessary component of the
information age.

We are drowning in information but starved for knowledge. 
         John Naisbitt

Google Answers Study:

http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/people/edelman/pubs/GoogleAnswers-011404.pdf

Very interesting, Bowler! Thanks!