TechCrunch Review: The Blekko Search Engine Prepares To Launch
Michael Arrington
Jul 19, 2010

It takes a crazier than average entrepreneur to go after the search market. There’s an entrenched player, Google, with 65% market share. Google is so powerful the second player, Yahoo, just bailed out of the market. And third place Microsoft is throwing billions of dollars around just to get in the game.

We’ve seen Wikia, Cuil and other well backed startups try and fail at search. Now Blekko is preparing to launch. Will they find success where everyone else has failed?

They’ve been working on Blekko for 2.5 years now – we first covered them in January 2008. Cofounder and CEO Rich Skrenta had just left his previous company, Topix. Blekko has raised three rounds of financing since then, totaling $20 million, from some of the most respected angel and venture investors in Silicon Valley.

Blekko remain in private alpha, although I’ve had the chance to test the engine over the last few days. They will shortly begin letting a few beta testers onto the site, and a full launch will happen later this summer.

What Makes Blekko Different?

Blekko is a full web search engine, with regular crawls of billions of web pages. But they know that they can’t beat Google at size of index, relevancy and speed right out of the gate. So they’re differentiating themselves in another way – by giving users tools to do new types of searches that they can’t do elsewhere. And by providing an unprecedented level of access to the algorithms and data that Blekko uses to determine relevancy.

That doesn’t mean Blekko’s relevancy isn’t great. The company says they’re on par with Google and Bing for most queries. But the differentiating feature are the query refinement tools they call Slashtags. These tools, like /news or /date or /amazon or /blogs, or any combination, make it very simple to quickly filter results to what you are looking for.

Users can create their own slashtags based on a group of URLs. I’ve created one that lists all TechCrunch sites to do easy site search. Others have created slashtags for conservative or liberal blogs, top tech sites, etc. If they make those slashtags public, others can use them, too.

The company also lets users search via a variety of APIs. Add /amazon to search on Amazon. Or /twitter to search via the Twitter API. Or just type /whatever.com to search just that domain.

Blekko Is Instantly Likeable

Anyone who’s used to advanced search tools on Google will instantly like Blekko. It’s much quicker than using things like “site:” modifiers on Google, and some of the searches you can do on Blekko you just can’t do on Google at all.

Will less advanced users like Blekko, too? The founders think they will. And since Blekko works just like the search engines they’re used to as well, they think people will quickly get comfortable creating and using slashtags.

Transparency

Blekko is also showing just about all the behind the scenes data that they have to determine rank and relevancy. You can see inbound links, duplicated content and associated metadata for any domain in their index.

Interview with the founders and a screencast of more features coming up in our next post.

Advertisement
  • Related Topics
Advertisement
  • Geoff Wright

    Still not going to win.

    Why? Its not Google. Unfortunate, but I fear, true.

  • http://www.mirceagoia.com Mircea

    If they get 1% of the market they got 1 billion of the search market (at least, that's what it's said: 1%=1 billion). Ask has about 4%…

  • San

    If Google had thought that (Its not Yahoo) in 2001, there would be no Google.

  • http://djbentley.net Daniel Bentley

    Joe Public doesn’t use a search engine, he Googles something.

    Is Blekko’s strategy to be bought out by GOOG? Competition is futile.

  • mikeMe

    Good to see some new faces in search… but if the "slash thing" is their secret weapon… then uuups… $20M.

  • Iqbal Gandham

    Is this it ? I have been doing this using @y,t,b,a for years now using firefox plugin, this is instead of the slashtags. In the aforementioned I would have searched, yahoo, twitter, bing and amazon in just one query, I can add @w for wikipedia, plus any other website/blog I want.

    When will search engines realise that they CANNOT sell a new search engine on better results, Google did not do this, they went for speed, in those days lycos was really slow, with all the Ads, google just was lighting fast on a 28.8K modem.

    If you compare results, or say "our results are better" the only way to prove it is to compare yours against legacy search engines, which people will not keep doing. The question new search engines need to ask is what would make google better EXCEPT for better/more relevant results.

    Iqbal

  • http://www.neoaid.com vincent

    they better get the one K version of their domain asap …. how many people will type bleko.com vs blekko.com ?

  • http://www.cdnpal.com Christopher

    "We’ve seen Wikia, Cuil and other well back startups try and fail at search. "

    Please don't spare Jason Calacanis and Mahalo from the list.

  • harniss

    Sounds interesting, making a point to Google these guys later. I'm sorry, "search on the internet" is what I meant. But not before I Rollerblade, I mean "inline skate." Verbs wins, their future is Bleakko…

  • igniman

    Hey blekko, i 've been longing for something like a "command line" interface to the most popular web services: Let 3rd party developers write "commands", like "/twitter blablabla" or "/calendar add milk tomorrow"

  • sahil garg

    ya… if they will occupy lil bit of the market… then its will be a great start and i think there slashtags will work…

  • http://tstmedia.com Justin

    heh….clever

  • http://www.facebook.com/stickfigure Jeff Schnitzer

    I think this idea is pretty cool. I haven't tried it (I'm not a beta tester), but from this review I can already tell I want it.

    80% of the time I'm doing searches I just want results from a small handful of what I consider reliable websites. Often I have to scroll down past annoying SEO hack websites to find the material I'm looking for. If I can build up a list of general sources, I'd rather hit them first before I go to a broader Google search.

    This would be really handy for software development – often I just want my searches to hit a handful of documentation sites, especially when dealing with overused terms like "request" and "connection".

  • http://www.facebook.com/puranjay Puranjay Singh

    I really don't think traditional search has much relevancy today.

    Most of my search queries these days are very, very basic – searches for sites, meanings of words, or a wikipedia entry.

    I could very well type these things into wikipedia.org and find them, but Google Chrome has an inbuilt search in the address bar which I find easier.

    Honestly, Google doesn't solve my needs anymore.

    When I want an answer to a real question – "Can I get into a good MBA school with a GMAT score of 700?" for instance, the only real answers can be found at niche specific forums, or from experienced FB friends. The latter is not a great source of info, however, since I refuse to load my FB friends list with 500 people I don't know, and with the current size of my list, there's no way I'm ever going to find enough people who are 'experienced' in something.

    Sites like Quora, however, don't really cut it either.

    As search becomes more and more mature, its going to be harder for Google to remain relevant. People will slowly but surely start searching for more specific topics right away, rather than the current technique of searching for a generic topic -> find site that answers question -> find answer.

    Search today needs to be more people centric – answers from real people. I hate to say this, but ChaCha actually solves a host of these problems. Its solution, of course, is like cauterizing a wound to make it heal.

    What is really needed is an intelligent system that can tap into people, divide them by their areas of expertise, and direct you to the ones who can actually get your questions answered.

  • http://blog.webdistortion.com Paul Anthony

    Slashtags = Rollyo.com but I'm keen to see what statistics they are planning on releasing.

  • whoop dedo

    i like skrenta and i while i don’t think this thing is cuil (a total disaster), i don’t see them converting over google users

    i don’t care about google’s algorithm…all i know is, most of the time it gives me what i want in the first link

  • http://twitter.com/philosophygeek Mark Johnson

    As a Kosmix and Powerset vetran who is now working at Bing, I am definitely rooting for these guys. However, I want to reiterated what I said in my blog post/ignite talk Death of the Search Startup. I just don't believe the Blekko can raise the capital that will allow them to compete with the likes of Google and Bing. The economics of search just don't allow for a search engine to be built slowly. I like the idea of slashtags, which have the potential to expand relevance algorithms to a broader group of developers and scientists (see the bruhaha from the NYT article about the gov't poking into search algorithms), but I'm not sure that's going to be a strong enough value prop to beat the big boys. I still am withholding judgment until I get to play with Blekko. I'd love to be proven wrong =)

    -Mark Johnson, Bing Program Manager

  • Robrrt

    Um, maybe I’m missing something here, but can’t most of this already be accomplished by using site: and inurl: plus the new filters?

    That leaves Twitter api results. Cute, but not worth $20m.

  • agreer

    ouch…

  • http://zackbatist.com Zack

    I could see this slash tag taking off

  • dirty harry

    ur solution actually describes the people/social/real aspect which is missing from search today, and its seems to me a logical area that fb would be entering at some point in time. IMHO its gonna happen. Nobody owns people interactions like they do.

  • Justin

    And I guess you feel kinda silly, now that a company has built a general-purpose search engine at 1/4 the low-end cost you estimated, right?

  • makiavelli

    word son, excellent point. natural language processing – when someone makes headway on that, hit me up cuz that would be real news

  • makiavelli

    hahahaha

  • Gilberto

    Yeh but Google brought something different to the game. These guys look gimiky with the slash tags. Take that away and they are a less relevant version of Bing.

  • Genivie

    This will not be a problem as people will just Google it

  • Genivie

    I'm going to go xerox this article….I mean copy it.

  • Genivie

    Google works because its easy, fast and relevant. If users have to make slashtags (or use them) the average user (read as 99% of the world) will not do it.

  • http://twitter.com/philosophygeek Mark Johnson

    I don't feel silly at all. They have built something… but to say that it can compete with the likes of Google or Bing is ridiculous. Is their index as big? As fresh? As relevant? Do they filter out spam? Are they doing a good job at feeding user input back into the engine? Do they have stock quotes and maps and news and. . .? Are they doing anything truly differentiating? As I said, I will wait until I actually try the search engine, but it's way too early to assume that they've built a Google-killer at 1/4 the cost. I'll stand by my numbers until I'm proven wrong =)

  • Andrew

    so just use a custom search engine from Google? google.com/cse

  • http://twitter.com/philosophygeek Mark Johnson

    That's a way old statistic… and getting to that 1st 1% is unlikely.

  • Etrigan

    Oh, the Fail!

    "Users can create their own slashtags " Sounds like fun! Ordinary people are just dying to learn what a 'slashtag' is, learn how to create one, and then create one each time they do a new search. Veeeeery convenient!

    Might as well save everybody some time and send these guys to the deadpool now, before anymore cash is burned on this me-too product that is actually worse than incumbent search engines.

  • morgan

    couldn't agree more…who outside of the tech word wants to use a slashtag? you think the brain dead people of the midwest will have a clue what to do? no… (but those same people know how to use google)

    well see, I could be proven wrong, search can be extremely profitable, but if they don't have a good way to manage their backend, they will burn through 20 mil in no time

  • Azot

    It depends. Google is not always easy fast and relevant.
    When Yelp was launched many technical people were asking why would one want to search special search engine for bars or restaurants, you can search google for find the best bar or restaurant in your neigbourhood. Nevertheless Yelp is a very successful project, since it provides "a little additional value" wrt to Google search but this value is good enough to make it very successful for special searches it is intended for. Google is not always easy, fast and relevant, and this guys trying to find a niche where Google is not as good. Hope they will be successful as Yelp was successful and won over Google.

  • azot

    most of the time it gives me what i want in the first link
    Tell me if Google gives you good first links what queries like "the best place to go in the Portland downtown", "classical music events today in Seattle".
    There are pretty large sets of queries for which Google fails. And small companies like this may try to get users for these types of searches. Do not forget about success of Yelp which is a specialized search engine.

  • http://www.mirceagoia.com Mircea

    I agree…it will take time and lots of money burnt to get 1%…

  • http://www.facebook.com/idzwan Ahmad Idzwan Ramli

    i use google advanced search a lot and i know how this would really ease things

    google advanced search takes time and newbies don't even know it's there

    we can comment all we want

    let it roll out and we'll see what happens

    comments and real-world happenings often contradict each other

    ask me 3 years ago if we would have a black american president and i'd think you're a nutcase

  • Robert

    You should. Your presentation doesn't take into the account that a search company doesn't have to "kill" Google to succeed. They just need to provide enough of an appealing alternative to capture a little bit of traffic, and then go from there. They don't need to skin the whole cat on day zero.

    Also, now you're being slippery to avoid looking foolish. Here's what you wrote in your talk:

    "the bare minimum cost of a search engine is $100M dollars and could be as much as (or even more than?) $300M dollars"

    As you say, that's your BARE MINIMUM estimate…not the full-featured, all-in Google killer. These guys have clearly done more than the bare minimum for less than a quarter of what you estimated. You're just wrong.

  • http://sethf.com/ Seth Finkelstein

    Being Google is a bad path because Google is already Google. The issue is what else one can be that's workable.

    This looks really interesting. It may not find it's way on launch day. But if it can get enough interest to sustain itself until it does find a niche, it could be something quite worthwhile.

  • http://nikolay.com nikolay

    Michael Arrington didn't want people to know where he lives now, but it's so obvious from this screencast! :)

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1799024762 Mark Wells

    search is for surfers – in the beginning there was no junk on the Yahoo directory – now the net is simply the same blog, twits and tweets reposted and ranked on "trusted" sites

    If DMOZ does a massive purge of their junk and a massive update of truly high quality sites and blekko grabs this and then spiders the web without using PR (page rank) + that slash tags thing with those sites that really Are great – this will be far better than Goog or Bing – Surfers will decide this – Not site owners

    Google's other search products, "spy" satellites, ect. can't be beat – but it's internet search sure can

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/wiseleo Leonid S. Knyshov

    That would be Mozilla Ubiquity

  • <am>

    no secret weapon, when google already has the site: tag search, so what's new? nothing really.

  • http://www.sriraj.org Sriraj

    Also, who has that ‘time’ to create slashtags and stuff…I’m not even using those sidebar options that Google lately introduced.

  • <am>

    .."it’s much quicker than using things like “site:” modifiers on Google" —- and how?
    .."and some of the searches you can do on Blekko you just can’t do on Google at all" —- like what?

  • Steve

    You could try http://yubnub.org/ or http://fefoo.com if you want something like a command line.

  • http://www.zvents.com Ethan Stock

    Robert, Mark has forgotten more about search than most people ever know. He's adding to the conversation and the ecosystem meaningfully with his talks, blog posts, comments here… and oh yeah his work at Bing. Aside from name-calling and kindergarten-grade triumphalism, what are you adding?

  • http://www.dharne.com janecooke

    Would love to try this out. Currently it seems to be like an earlier Google version with an easier Customized Search option. As they are new, they can hopefully innovate in directions the big ones cannot go in.

    One key area is Google does not allow easy sharing of search results (for projects), another rating and recommending a particular result to your network across social sites (not just the search engine's network). There would be some other scenarios where they can focus and differentiate.

    It is good that there are people atleast willing to fight the good fight in this market, tough as it is.

  • http://www.techarraz.com Chinmoy

    If I ever use anything else than Google, it will be Duckduckgo.com

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/ninagosaimas ninagosaimas

    Hopefully this does us some good. Currently, I like to use scroogle.org for the moment. Not only because its SERP aren't filled with those ads, but every time it loads, its main page opens your mind to what are the real intentions of google to your life.

  • Kevin

    I've known the guys behind Blekko long enough to know not to discount them based upon one little peek into their new system. Definitely looking forward to an open beta.

  • http://twitter.com/peterc Peter Cooper

    Altavista was a pretty light search engine in the mid to late 90s and had gained serious traction by 1997. Google was lighter and faster, sure, but it was 1) the quality of results and 2) the depth of the index where it totally blew Altavista out of the water. (Altavista even dropped submitting your site for free and tried to charge.. not a good plan.)

  • Barron

    I think there's something to this, actually. As popular search engines have competed for the largest market share, they've really lost transparency. Google, Bing, and the others do a lot of second-guessing of user intent in order to be "the easiest to use". As a technology analyst, I do a lot of searching online and yearn for the days when Google basically just searched for keywords (I'm simplifying obviously). Making a search engine for the heaviest users is an interesting way to take a corner of the search market. If Blekko is approximately as relevant as Google but more transparent, I for one would use it.

  • http://twitter.com/philosophygeek Mark Johnson

    Hey, thanks for the pat-on-the-back, Ethan.

    @Robert: note that, in my presentation, I'm talking about a full-scale, general-purpose search engine, not a vertical search engine. ZVents (where Ethan works) is a perfect example of the kinds of search engines that I *do* think could actually work, because they slice the search problem into a tractable chunk on which they can do something more interesting than just a typical keyword search. Blekko is trying to go all-the-way with general purpose search. My assertion is that they will have to, at minimum, duplicate the relevance, freshness, and scope of Google/Bing. A tall order, indeed and far more than $40M will buy, unfortunately.

    Trust me, if I thought I were wrong, I'd be out there founding a search startup.

  • Mud Hen

    Speaking for the good people of Toledo, I, sir, am offended. Manage your own back end, jerky.

  • http://twitter.com/peterc Peter Cooper

    Ah yes, because every Web site has to be focused to the brainless mass market!

  • Obs

    Mahalo was a search engine? I thought it was an attempt to spam search engines…

  • Nick

    You may be right, but I'm going to have to blekko that to be sure.

  • http://www.facebook.com/faisal1 Faisal Saud

    Mahalo is not real search engine.

  • http://twitter.com/rsardeha @rsardeha

    It's good to see more players in the search industry taking an different approach. Good luck guys.

  • http://localbusinessmarketingonline.ca Dan

    I agree, having more players keeps competition moving and prevents any one search engine from having domination

  • Guest

    Personally, I've been using http://www.bevyfind.com for a while now. It's ability to show various types of results (news, twitter, etc) together with the web results has become indispensable to my web searches. The ability to open the results websites on the screen is nifty too, though I use it less.

  • http://www.facebook.com/ciaranihuiginn Ciara Higgins

    It is obvious that search will compartmentalize itself, they will find a niche, Gasta.com is one of the worlds first viral search engines that can be launched in minutes so that is one team up right there!

  • http://twitter.com/mackenziepricee mackenziepricee

    Wow Peter hope that was a joke.

    What Etrigan stated was the fact, and its hard to deny.

    Please grow up.

  • http://twitter.com/mackenziepricee mackenziepricee

    As a really dedicated Bing user, I have seen the search engine grow from a little start up to a website that almost has around 30% marketshare in search (with the Yahoo! and Microsoft Search alliance).

    The reality is the only way you are going to grow, compete with Google and Bing and succeed (and by succeed, I mean earn money, because at the end of the day that’s what it is all about) is with a lot of money behind you. $20 million will simply not grab the public’s attention. Sure it may build them a search engine and keep them going for a few years, but that is about it. Microsoft has proved this. After a $90 million plus advertising campaign they are only sitting on around 12% in the US.

  • http://twitter.com/mackenziepricee mackenziepricee

    The general public just want to get on a search engine and search for what they want. They do not want to be mucking around with slashtags.

    Another example is Cuil. Look at all the hype that created. And quote me on this, wasn’t that men to be the Google Killer? It had over $30 million in funding, yet the whole website crashed on the first day, and from then on it has been going downhill. (http://techcrunch.com/2008/07/29/how-to-lose-your-cuil-20-seconds-after-launch/)

    The only way to beat Google is to do something different, something better, which the normal consumer will love. At the moment Bing is the only one doing this and if they keep going at the speeds that have been going for the last year, I personally think they will catch Google.

    By the way Mark, I hope to work at Microsoft with the Bing team in the United States after I have finished my education! I am only 15 now, so still a while to go. :)

    Mackenzie Price
    @mackenziepricee

  • Guest

    I think you need to google Google and the word "dominate"

  • http://www.bargainvillas.co.uk Karl

    I think anything new is always a good thing. I hope things take off for these guys. Good luck.

  • Hanniel Evan Yucoco

    Interesting… we’ll see when this is released. Going to give this a go before I state out my opinion. Again, I’m opening my mind for another competitor as long as it doesn’t crash often.

  • Ben

    You can already do that with Google's site: command

  • JasonsAss

    That’s a load of hooey spread by Jason CalacAnus.

  • http://www.yackyack.co.uk robwatts

    An additional interesting aspect to all of this is perhaps @skrenta’s background. ODP was huge for a time. He was a big part of that. Whilst ODP maybe a thing of the past today, many of it’s founding principles can be seen elsewhere and thriving. Wikipedia being one that springs to mind and oh, facebook.

    If Blekko (a big if maybe) can prick the ears of tech evangelists and engage people socially through clever use and integration of what’s already there, then who knows, maybe they’ll fly. Small and lean beats big and mean?

    I hope they succeed! :)

  • http://www.nearfieldcommunicationsworld.com Mike

    No, no, I’m sure I remember AltaVista was the absolute business then it bloated right up all of a sudden with loads of rubbish on the front page, and that’s why I started using that young upstart Google thing.

    I think AltaVista played an important — if unwitting — role in Google’s early success.

    I’m off to tie an onion to my belt…

  • http://www.startuparabia.com Mohamed Marwen Meddah

    I think the slashtags are an interesting feature that could come in really handy at times; but the thing is, how much of an advantage is it? how long would it take Google to roll out the same thing? I’m guessing Google can have it up in no time, they have the capability, it’s just about simplifying how advanced searches are done.

    I like the transparency bit and it’s interesting to see how things are being ranked; but most searchers wouldn’t care as long as they’re getting good and relevant results; so it’s not really a plus for them when it comes to your everyday search user.

  • http://www.pradeepsanyal.com Pradeep

    Don’t think it is targeted to everyone. Only power users will want to use it – which is still a huge market.

  • http://www.pradeepsanyal.com Pradeep

    if it’s as good as google/bing in organic results and has those slashtags to play around with, of course this is a winner for a lot of users! yes, some more transparency will help. google’s penalty system (and lowering competitors serp) is a huge black box.

    and i hope MS doesnt eye this company if it is a hit.

  • http://www.dailyblogging.org Mani Viswanathan

    Hope to see a BETA invite from them soon enough..:P

  • Mark Wells

    Duckduckgo.com is another piece of crap seo created directory/search scam that made a fortune buying advertising from Google and ripping off webmasters – Duckduckgo should be Duckduck- gone – it has no traffic and horrible sites –

    BOTW (best of the web) $150 aprox. to get listed and NO traffic – another example of SEO getting $$$$ from Goog’s failed page rank system (well it’ll be failed soon)

    Notice those “report spam” links next to blekko’s results – aparently it’s automated – by by spammers – by by pagerank – byby crap

  • Victor

    Funny, how so many open-minded “tech” people on here are not open to new technologies.

    I guess you like the status quo, you can keep your google with all their privacy issues, non-support, and general arrogance.

  • beniz

    Collaboration among users on top of traditional search engine results is probably one of the key of the future of websearch. Open Source may be the other key for bringing transparency to the search black boxes. http://www.seeks-project.info is trying both directions.

  • http://www.researchgoddess.com Amybeth Hale

    People who are heavy users of search engines will take the time. I edit an online publication, http://www.sourcecon.com, and my readers are the type of people who would jump on this. They are heavy, heavy search engine users and always looking for new tools and resources. To say that a new product will never make it is pre-mature and assumes that it is only targeted to the vanilla mainstream users. I have high hopes for this and look forward to reviewing it!

  • http://www.pradeepsanyal.com Pradeep

    got the beta id and I am quite impressed with what i have seen till now. definitely for power search users. hope they mark out a niche for themselves.

  • Mark Wells

    possibly blekko will be the solution Google’s Page Rank sceme where it is IMPOSSIBLE to get traffic without backlinks or the IMPOSSIBLE DMOZ.org listing – Leaving Surfers with millions of “circle jerk” spam networks for any heavily sought after search terms – Luckily blekko’s concern seems to be for Surfers which will be great for webmasters with great sites – and not so good for spammers and seo scams

  • http://www.icrawl.us ChrisW

    I actually think they have a chance. One reason I believe that Ask.com never gained more prominence is that it chose not to engage with the SEO/SEM audience. Blekko on the other hand has and doing so makes it leaps and bounds over others as SEO/SEM professionals will start referencing the engine and that will slowly create an impact with their clients, etc., etc. This done in combination with a good marketing campaign could create a winner!

    Just for reference even small engines can be VERY profitable. A study done recently showed that even 1% of global search market share could equal 3 billions dollars – Why Do Small Engine Exist – http://www.trafficflowseo.com/2009/07/why-do-smal...

  • http://www.buy-replicas.com lola

    wo

blog comments powered by Disqus
Advertisement
Got a tip? Building a startup? Tell us