Amid the growing interest in Microsoft’s new search engine, Bing, and TechCrunch’s enthusiasm about stealth start-up, Blekko, it seems like the right time to take a look at how some of the much-hyped search engine start-ups over the past year have done.

All in all, it’s been disappointing. The chart below – sourced from Compete.com – show that SearchMe and Mahalo have about 2.8 million unique U.S. visitors a month, while Cuil is struggling with 126,720 and Wiki Search is barely alive with 80.955. Meanwhile, Wolfram Alpha – the latest overly-hyped search engine – hasn’t been live long enough for Compete to gather enough data.

Of the group below, it is interesting to see that SearchMe has shown good traction since November, while Mahalo seems to be holding its own. Cuil, meanwhile, has to rank as one of the most over-hyped and least successful search start-ups, while Wolfram Alpha has potential to be a Cuil, although the it’s still early days.

Without a doubt, launching a search engine is a perilous exercise, not only because you’re going head to head with Google. The benchmark for new players is very high, and there’s significant potential for disappointment if the service works well but not in a much better or different way than Google.

Still, there are entrepreneurs who believe there’s a different and/or search engine to be developed keeping. And they seem to be able to raise financing from VCs who believe that a viable alternative to Google can emerge, if not a Google-killer.

Clearly, part of the challenge is managing expectations, and trying to figure out the right balance between attracting enough attention from the media, bloggers and users, while staying fairly low profile. TechCrunch provides some insight into what Blekko is trying to do, even though talking with TechCrunch could blow Blekko super-stealth approach.

(For more Blekko, check out Screenwerk, which believes Blekko “will quickly “imprint” on its intended audience and that they will embrace the search engine in earnest”. The photo is from Blekko’s home page.)

So far, I like how Microsoft is approaching the market with Bing. While it’s impossible tell from a three minute video about how a new service will actually perform, Bing appears to be different enough from Google that consumers will give it a shot. It’s impossible to tell whether Blekko has potential but it’s definitely intriguing.

Update: I think Seth Godin is making a mistake in dismissing Bing as “trying to be next next Google”.

Technorati Tags: bing, blekko, google, microsoft, search engines

So, Wolfram|Alpha is sort of live after a lot of hype and blogger salivating.

Not surprisingly, the reviews are mixed: TechCrunch is “not super-impressed”, although “it shows a lot of promise”, while Plugged.in suggests Wolfram not a “Google-Killer But a Serious Threat”.

At the end of the day, Wolfram may or may not live up to expectations, and it may or may not become a successful search engine/search engine business. But what Wolfram’s launch illustrates once again is the challenges and perils of being the new kid on the search block.

Google has set the bar so high that the launch of new search engines can be a treacherous experience if not handled properly and positioned really well. To pitch yourself as a Google-killer will certainly attract a lot of attention but it’s likely to blow up in your face.

Look at what happened to Cuil when it burst on the scene claiming to have a larger database than Google. The problem was although Cuil’s database may have been larger, the user experience failed to be significantly more impressive so Cuil failed. (Look at the traffic numbers below to see how badly Cuil has struggled since its launch).

So, what do you do if you’re a new search engine? How do you give yourself a chance of successfully launching? How do you get the media, bloggers and consumers to give you the chance to prove yourself?

The key may be loudly proclaiming that you’re not Google, and don’t want to be Google. In a sense, Wolfram has tried to do it but when bloggers and the media think about search, they think about Google. This is why Wolfram is finding it difficult not to be compared to Google even though it’s not really competing against Google.

The second important consideration is having a service that’s amazing right out of the gate. As much as companies can learn a lot from public alpha or betas, they also provide a forum for public failure.

Look at what happened to Flock, the social media browser, when it launched a public alpha. The product wasn’t ready for prime time let alone a friends and family beta so Flock was crucified – and it’s never really recovered.

Finally, a new search engine needs to have a well-honed plan to keep pushing forward after launch. It’s one thing to throw a lot of time and resources into getting the product out the door but it’s also important to keep moving forward from a communications, marketing and business perspective as the product improves and evolves. At the end of the day, great services should, in theory, be successful. Sometimes, you need to keep telling people how well you’re doing.

Update: Henry Blodget dismisses Wolfram as having “big dreams but no chance” because “search isn’t broken. It can be improved, yes, and companies like Wolfram Alpha will show Google how to improve it. But no search engine we’ve seen, including this one, comes close to making the quantum leap in performance required to get real volumes of Internet users to switch.”

Technorati Tags: cuil, flock, google, wolfram

In the wake of Google’s Searchology event and Google’s plans to extend its domination of the search market, it raises the question about what a Google-Killer (GK) would look like and what it would need to offer (if, in fact, a GK could exist/emerge).

Here are 10 attributes that GK would need to possess.

1. A GK would, of course, have to feature great or good enough results to meet the needs of most users.

2. A GK would have to offer a user-friendly interface. It would have to be clean, easy to use and intuitive.

3. A GK would provide some sizzle in addition to search results – perhaps related search results found on Twitter or blogs.

4. A GK would be scrappy but humble. It would definitely not position itself as a GK, or come across as arrogant.

5. A GK would have a huge database but it wouldn’t be sold as a front and centre asset. Instead, an extensive database would be seen as table stakes to play in the search market.

6. A GK would mostly grow based on word of mouth and virally.

7. A GK would operated by a small group of super-smart people who could engage with search users while still developing in semi-stealth mode.

8. A GK would provide great customer service, and happily accept suggestions, criticisms and feedback.

9. A GK would be adored by the media and bloggers, who would do a lot of the heavy lifting from a marketing perspective.

10. A GK wouldn’t be a GK but simply a great search engine.

What else would a GK need to establish a solid foothold in the market?

More: Richard MacManus wonders if the new features – Search Options and Rich Snippets – unveiled by Google yesterday are an indication that it may be losing its core focus.

Technorati Tags: google, search engines