I think it’s time to start looking at the actual time frame when some of these newer block chain projects can actually start delivering. The reason I think this is important is because it seems many people think a lot of breakthroughs are right around the corner, and while this seems exciting, it really doesn’t match up with the reality of technological advancement.

Let’s look at a project like Ethereum. Despite what your opinions are on Ethereum, it probably has one of the most legitimate teams in blockchain when you look at the people involved and the amount of work they put in. So using this as a sort of gold standard, Ethereum has really been moving slowly towards its own improvements and updates.

Now I’m not saying this to bash Ethereum, I already stated I believe it to be the gold standard as far as dev teams go. But what it illustrates is that even a top tier team working full time can only make small improvements in a year. Technology takes time, especially coding. Anyone who has worked as a coder or has been involved with coding knows it’s one of the most time consuming activities there are. There is no way to fast forward coding and testing. It just takes time. And in blockchain, you are dealing with things that have no precedent, so the testing is even more important.

So based on this, when you move down the crypto ladder to projects with dev teams that are either smaller or less talented than that of Ethereum, you are looking at even longer development times.

The next big issue is security. Nothing is secure in the software world until it has been out fully in the public for years. It needs to be attacked by virtually every hacker so all the security flaws can be found. So this puts an automatic time penalty on any new coin that is looking to store value or be a currency.

Take Nano for instance. Many people claim this coin to be far superior to BTC and other currency coins out there. And it very well could be. But it is far to0 new to be considered secure enough for people to start using it as a store of value like they do BTC. This isn’t to say Nano isn’t secure, but the truth is nobody knows. It has not been popular enough and public enough to be attacked by hackers around the world. That just takes years of being out there.

Because of this, nobody is going to buy Nano for $10K like they will with BTC as a store of value. It simply isn’t secure enough. Now, all of this isn’t to attack Nano, once again this is just an example and it may very well be hack proof. But nobody knows until it has been out there for years and years. This is true of all software like this, and it holds true for all coins. They have to prove they are secure before they can expect their valuations to reach BTC levels, and this is true for all coins.







So based on those observations, we are probably several years away from a major blockchain achievement. There will be project updates and huge news, but that big breakthrough everyone predicts is still years away. For example, look at streaming TV. In the 1990’s there were countless companies promoting streaming TV and Web TV. Everybody knew it was the future. But it took 20 years for it to finally become mainstream. Now, I’m not saying blockchain will take that long as there are not as many technical hurdles, but the comparison is valid. The reason is because even though many people can see something as the future, it doesn’t mean it will happen tomorrow.

So how does this impact your investing strategy? As usual, when things may take years to develop and the barrier to entry is low, such as it is in blockchain, you need to be on the lookout for newer projects that can harm your current holdings. You may love Iota but in the years they need to develop, can someone else come along and displace them? Of course they can, so you need to be on the look out for these and be objective. Don’t become attached to your project or investment. As we all know, this market loves the new projects the most, so it’s very easy for existing projects to be displaced if they don’t deliver.