I was told by the recruiter that the hiring committee had passed me, and I subsequently had a conversation with a team manager that seemed fine. Then heard I was nixed at the final executive review--something like that.

Was contacted after the usual six months by a new recruiter wanting me to apply again. Asked what happened last time, which he seemed to know nothing about. He investigated, and came back with the corporate-speak I interpreted as "too old" (though phrased in a way that would probably avoid legal issues).

The "no head count" explanation doesn't make much sense to me. And in any case, given the effort required to go through the process, it'd be kind of a dick move to be interviewing candidates when there were no openings.

Their recruiters continue to contact me about every six months.

By "no head count" I meant was it could happen that the head count they are conducting interview for was lost by the time the package reached its final stage. Giving Google's extremely long hiring process, I imagine this happens more often to Google then to other tech companies.

I do wish companies are more transparent about their hiring decisions.

I could see that for a small company. For a company of Google's size and wealth, it simply doesn't make sense not to pick up a good candidate even if you don't need them right away.

In any case, it did drive home the point that Google would never see me as anything but marginal and expendable, and I realized that there were other places where I could really matter.