I am doing an analysis on why expert websites like
ExpertCentral, Answers.com, EXP, Askme.com, AllExperts, Webhelp.com,
Suite 101, Clip2 and LookSmart Live have failed. (most of these were
private companies now out of business)

On the other hand, I am interested in why Keen.com and Yahoo Experts
have survived and what kind of revenue/business they have generated
during these years.

I am interested in specific strategies (marketing, sales, business
development, partnerships) these companies adopted that has lead them
to failure or success.

---

Request for Question Clarification by claudietta-ga on 11 Nov 2002 18:01 PST

Sam,

In a nutshell, I believe it is primarily due to their inability to
control for quality.

I think that RCD below is correct in that it will be difficult to get
actual strategies for all these companies, especially because they're
gone.  What I propose to do is to search for industry articles and
other literature which hypothesize on reasons for their failures.

Let me know if you are interested in this approach.

Also, I would not necessarily declare Yahoo or Keen's strategies as
successful as of yet.  It may be a matter of time before their we
really know how their strategies work.
 
Claudietta

---

Clarification of Question by sam420-ga on 11 Nov 2002 19:20 PST

claudietta,

Quality could be one reason on why they failed, but I am sure there
are a lot of other factors that were in play there.

<<<I think that RCD below is correct in that it will be difficult to
get
actual strategies for all these companies, especially because they're
gone.  

I realize this!

<<<What I propose to do is to search for industry articles and
other literature which hypothesize on reasons for their failures.

What other types of literature/reference materials can I get?

<<<Also, I would not necessarily declare Yahoo or Keen's strategies as
successful as of yet.  It may be a matter of time before their we
really know how their strategies work.

The reason I used Keen is because they are going to be profitable soon
or already are. I wanted to know what they are doing different...in
quality..operations..pricing etc. that was different that the others
in the same business.

What do you think?

---

Request for Question Clarification by claudietta-ga on 11 Nov 2002 20:25 PST

Alrighty...

First, it would be interesting to know the purpose of your analysis. 
Is it academic, business, ...

Second, the reason I am interested in this question is that I've run
into a number of articles (newspaper, magazine, databases) that
address this very subject.  There are also a number of proprietary
databases for reports in business schools, which can also be searched
on this topic.  The information is scattered.

My concern is that I am sure that I can provide you with literature
(what other's think is happening with these type of companies),
however, I cannot be certain on the extent or quality of what is
written.  For example, plenty may be written for Yahoo, but little on
Suite 101.  Some of it may be from business leaders, some from
academicians.  In addition, I may not be able to address all specific
strategies for each company listed in your question.

I just wonder if you are able to work with this sort of uncertainty,
and how important is for your subject to be researched, without too
much regard to your having each and every point in your question
answered in detail.

Claudietta

<The advice service companies that have survived are those that are
charging for their services. This has several advantages. By allowing
their experts to earn money for answering questions they are able to
attract more highly qualified experts. They are also able to attract a
greater number of experts. This results in a better quality service.
It cuts down the response time to questions. It also gives the
companies a more stable model to generate revenue. Those that have
relied on advertising have found that the advertising market is not
consistent and is therefore less reliable. Companies like Looksmart
who offered a free service and relied on advertising to generate
revenue could not survive when the online advertising market slumped.
They failed to get enough advertising revenue to cover their fixed
costs.

According to IT Week, Yahoo expert has had little success with its
advice site. Yahoo Expert was a free advice site with revenue coming
from advertising. Yahoo is now launching a new pay advice site in
collaboration with live advice. Live advice connects callers with
experts over the phone and via email. It charges 16 cents per-minute
connection fee for phone calls made through its service within the
United States and Canada and takes a 30 percent to 50 percent
commission on fees charged by advice givers. The new service will also
follow this model and charge for calls. Yahoo and Live advice will
share the revenue generated. Around 47% of Yahoo’s registered users
have cell phones. With the innovation of internet connections via cell
phones it will mean that its users will be able to use the service
from remote locations and not just via their computers.

Live advice has had to modify its content as a result of its
partnership with Yahoo. It previously offered adult content which has
now been removed.

The main competitor with Yahoo will be Keen.com. It is currently
involved with in litigation with Live advice over a dispute about
patents. Keen.com is the web’s most popular person-to-person advice
site. It attracts 2.6 million visitors per month. It has 800.000
registered users. Some commentators have likened its service to that
of the live phone chat business as it sells a lot of advice relating
to horoscopes. However its customers appear to like the live
interaction that the service provides. Keen.com is currently not in
profit but anticipates future profits. It has been particularly
successful in attracting venture capital. To date it has raised $109
million. Keen.com is part of the business to business market which
expected to be worth $6 billion by the year 2005.

Some advice sites have received a lot of bad publicity for failing to
pay their contributors. Suite 101 failed to pay writers that
contributed to its sites. They blamed financial problems but enquiries
by writers into their finances have revealed otherwise. About.com
which bought expert central failed to share revenue generated by its
sites with contributors as agreed in their contracts.  Former
contributors are currently suing about.com. Writer’s weekly.com
publishes a warning list for writers. Both suite 101 and about.com
appear on the list. There have been so many complaints about Suite 101
that Writers Weekly has stopped posting them on its site. A link is
given below to Writers Weekly where you can read the many complaints.

Answers.com failed to keep pace with sites like Ask Jeeves and was
bought by Net Shepherd, Inc. Exp.com laid off 17 employees, or 15
percent of its staff and is shifting its business focus from the
consumer market to providing technology for other business. Exp.com is
backed by CMGI which is also in deep financial trouble. It has
reportedly lost $2.56 billion. According to news.com staff writer,
Larry Barrett, The bulk of that net loss comes from a $2.03 billion
non-cash impairment charge related to goodwill associated with its
acquisitions of AdForce, AdKnowledge, AltaVista, Flycast and
Yesmail.com.
Clip2.com allowed practically anyone to become an expert which lead to
criticism.>


<Additional links.>

<Keen.com>
<http://www.redherring.com/vc/2000/1012/vc-keen101200.html>

<Keen.com-funding>
<http://www.keen.com/documents/corpinfo/press101100.asp>

<Revenue of keen.com compared to Yahoo.>
<http://www.keen.com/documents/corpinfo/press110800.asp>

<Exp.com>
<http://www.upside.com/Executive_Briefing/3a2d8a6e1.html>

<About CMGI>
<http://news.com.com/2100-1017-254064.html?legacy=cnet>

<Looksmart’s failure.>
<http://www.infotoday.com/newsbreaks/nb020506-1.htm>

<Info about keen.com and Yahoo.>
http://news.zdnet.co.uk/story/0,,t269-s2108834,00.html>


<Answers.com>
<http://www.ecommercetimes.com/perl/story/1950.html>

<yahoo –advice site>
<http://news.com.com/2100-1017-894968.html>

<Writers weekly warnings>
<http://www.writersweekly.com/warnings/warnings.html>

<About advice sites.>
<http://www.traffick.com/story/08-2000/5bettersearch-expert.asp>

<Search and rescue>
<http://www.itweek.co.uk/Features/1134755>



<Search strategy:>

<"yahoo experts" revenue>
<://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=ISO-8859-1&q=%22yahoo+experts%22+revenue>

<"exp.com" failed >
<://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=ISO-8859-1&q=%22exp.com%22+failed++>

<"dot com failures">
<://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=ISO-8859-1&q=%22dot+com+failures%22>

<news "question and answer websites">
<://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=ISO-8859-1&q=news&as_q=%22question+and+answer+websites%22>

<"keen.com" revenue>
<://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=ISO-8859-1&q=%22keen.com%22&as_q=revenue>


<Hope this helps.>

---

Request for Answer Clarification by sam420-ga on 14 Nov 2002 09:13 PST

Although this answer was a good attempt at some parts of the question,
it does not answer it to the level of detail that I was looking for.
For example, I don't think it answered this directly either:

For example,
<<I am interested in specific strategies (marketing, sales, business 
development, partnerships) these companies adopted that has lead them
to failure or success.

The specific strategies that I asked for each company have not been
addressed and I got a few vague pieces of information when I followed
this suggested link in the answer:

http://www.upside.com/Executive_Briefing/3a2d8a6e1.html>

" Online advice site Exp.com laid off 17 employees..."

Also, it touched on parts which I never asked such as the CMGI article
on CNET.

Please don't get me wrong, I just don't think its fair to the amount
of price I posted it for. I am willing to pay a partial amount for
your work if that is acceptable to you.

---

Clarification of Answer by belindalevez-ga on 14 Nov 2002 15:45 PST

<Expert central 
Marketing strategies – word of mouth, viral marketing and active PR
activities.
Links were advertised as follows:
ExpertCentral.com-A New Way to Get Answers from Real Experts!
ExpertCentral.com offers expert advice from over 7,000 experts in over
350 categories such as: Arts, Computers, Career, Entertainment,
Health, Home, Law, Pets, Science and more…

Allexperts.com
Allexperts.com was founded in 1998 by Steven Gordon. There were
difficulties in recruiting experts in professional fields like
medicine and the law. People started linking to the site as it
provided a good service and resource for users. Within a year the site
grew to 1 million monthly pay views. It continued to grow reaching 4
million monthly page views.

Initially the site was promoted with mainly text links and PR. A story
was printed in the New York Times which got picked up by approximately
another 100 newspapers and magazines.
Initially the site was a one man operation. Experts were recruited
through newsgroups and websites.

When the monthly page views reached 1 million, they signed up
DoubleClick, receiving $1.20-$1.40 per thousand page impressions.

Strategies that have worked including good web design and usability
and not requiring users to register before accessing the site.
Editorial and advertorial have proved good marketing strategies.

In 2000 the site was sold to About.com.

Answers.com
Answers.com formed a marketing partnerships with !hey inc. (see link
below).
Links as follows were used:
Answers.comŽ/Web Enabled Customer Interaction 
From Answers.comŽ 

The Darnell Works Agency was used to provide PR campaigns.
Overwhelmed by questions? Let Answers.comŽ enhance your customer
support. Customers can ask questions in plain English and get answers
fast -- right on your Web site. Try it now at www.answers.com and get
your free booklet -- Question Your Question FlowTM. Answers.com -
Handle more questions.

Askme.com
In 2000, askme.com has over 3 million unique visitors per month.
Partnerships with WoWtown.com and FreeSkills.


Keen – Print and TV advertising. It has partnerships with eBay, AT&T,
C/NET, CBS Sportsline, Etrade and Seniornet.

Exp.com
Exp.com has partnerships with eTouch.com, Craft.com, Event 411.com,
HungryMinds.com, MarketIt Right.com, OhGolly.com, Internet.com and
World pages.com.

In June 2000 Exp.com signed a deal with Ask Jeeves.com to advertise
its services.

Clip2
Clip 2 was launched at the Demo 2000 show. It received coverage in PC
Magazine as a Top 100 Web Site.

Webhelp.com
Webhelp.com signed up 50,000 new members in its first seven days of
operation.
The service was promoted by NMP. The CEO was interviewed live on
CNNfn’s Digital Jam and was broadcast nationwide. It was also a lead
story on MSNBC.com and featured by Dow Jones Newservice, Canadian
Business, Forbes.com, Newsweek.com, and American Banker.

LookSmart 
Partnerships with Inktomi, Fast Search & Transfer, Direct Hit and
RealNames.
LookSmart received negative press over its pay per click small
business listings program.
Lot21.com, a San Francisco-based interactive marketing and advertising
agency was used to promote Looksmart.

<Additional links:>
<Expert sites use human engines.>
<http://www.informationhighways.net/mag/mprevious/00jun05.html>

<Interview with Steven Gordon found and owner of AllExperts.com>
<http://www.webadvantage.net/tip_archive.cfm?tip_id=173&&a=1>

<Answers.com – marketing partnership>
http://www.realmarket.com/news/answersdotcom101100.html>

<Exp.com partners with eTouch.com>
<http://siliconvalley.internet.com/news/article.php/346431>

<Exp.com partners with MarketIt Right.com>
<http://www.marketitright.com/about/pr.asp?ID=26>

<Exp.com and Ask Jeeves.>
<http://news.com.com/2100-1017-242368.html?legacy=cnet>

<Exp.com and internet.com>
<http://www.internet.com/corporate/releases/99.09.28-expcom.html>

<Askme.com partners with WoWtown.com>
<http://www.prweb.com/releases/2000/7/prweb16536.php>

<Askme enters into corporate market.>
<http://www.internetnews.com/bus-news/article.php/452181>

<Webhelp.com>
<http://www.webhelp.com/webhelp/newsroom/pr991208.jsp>

<WebHelp.com – PR campaign.>
<http://www.nealemay.com/aboutus/casestudies/web.asp>

<LookSmart - negative press.>
<http://www.website101.com/Search_Engine_Positioning/looksmart_looksdumb.html>

<Clip2>
<http://www.tradespeak.com/VTBFullBio.asp?vtbid=315>


<Search strategy:>
<expertcentral marketing>
<://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=ISO-8859-1&q=expertcentral&as_q=marketing>

<answers.com marketing>
<://www.google.com/search?q=answers.com+marketing&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&start=40&sa=N>


<Hope this helps.>

---

Request for Answer Clarification by sam420-ga on 13 Dec 2002 04:29 PST

Hi,

Thanks for all your hard work on this. Please post any more
partnership/alliances information that you may have about these
companies. I am also interested in how they marketed/or are marketing
their services for specific audiences in specific categories.

regards,
sam

Although this question was a difficult one, the researcher took a very
structured approach to do a good amount of research and gave me some
very pertinent information to the question. I would have appreciated
more data (financial numbers and performance) in the answer.

Hello Sam420,

This is a very interesting question, however it would seem unlikely
that information about their specific strategies would be available.
As you noted many of the mentioned sites are no longer functioning.

You could broaden your research parameters to successful internet
business models.

A useful site I found that details these issues can be found at
http://stylusinc.com/website/business_models.htm

This may help you get started.

Thanks rcd, the article is good for internet business models, but too
generic to what I am looking for.

It is fascinating that you are researching elements of my dissertation
(work in progress) for grad school in Malibu CA. It is really a shame
that we can’t connect here (GA policy). The information that I’ve been
researching covers well over 1-year of data that you would find as
interesting as I have in gathering it. I'm absolutuly sure we could
learn a great deal from each other. Let’s see, keep your eye online
for Digital Squeeze (currently reworking) and we might be able to
talk.