Bitcoin is in flux again, and the same critics calling crypto “a giant bubble” have rallied their sad, bearish bannermen, claiming the same old tired gibberish as usual.

Mainstream voices are calling Bitcoin a bubble. Long-term players like yours truly are claiming there is nothing to worry about, as this has happened before. And average users are throwing their hands in the air saying that “nobody knows”.

Let’s posit a more constructive analysis.

Blockchain technology is real. But the mind-numbing price rollercoaster in crypto isn’t going away any time soon, and there’s a reason for which no quick solution exists.

Put simply, if nobody or next to nobody is actively using blockchain, or some subset of it like the Ethereum network, then the intrinsic value is predicated on its trading value, which is in turn subject to hype, rhetoric, market whales and rather dreadfully – news stories.

In other words, if there isn’t enough activity with real substance behind it, which is to say that if there aren’t people building communities on blockchain – using decentralised software in their everyday lives, retail or otherwise – then volatility will persist because presently, the price largely reflects sentiment without substantive real-world value.

In order for the market to mature towards less volatility, there needs to be a marked transition that takes us from the single use case of trading towards something more concrete.

To put things into a clearer perspective, consider the hysterical headlines people have been force fed for the past year or so. By following the news, one gets the sense that everything is either shooting towards the stars – something that even we are somewhat guilty of promoting due to our enthusiasm – or that it’s all one giant scam, as millionaire-dinosaur Warren Buffett seems to think.

The truth is that while there is reason to be optimistic, belief-fuelled-hype is the main market force that currently underpins market volatility, which is in part why headlines such as the “17 millionth mined Bitcoin” gain much more traction than they ought to.

Blockchain remains relatively small. In fact, the funds generated by new ICO projects combined is just a small fraction of what a single tech giant like Apple generates in revenue over the same period.

In real terms, this means that blockchain is still merely a drop in a much larger ocean of tech.

However, what if that drop were to be scalable and successfully implemented?

Currently, some of blockchain’s most hyped innovations, like relatively stable coins and decentralised exchanges, continue to focus on trading. In order for the market to mature, these startups and firms need to shift their attention towards developing every day, applicable smart contract platforms. Alternatively, they could focus on creating open-source frameworks for developers to write dapps with ease, as EOS seeks to do – among other things.

In the video-gaming world, such projects are called open-sandboxes, and have given rise to a plethora of nuanced, money-generating and highly popular gaming genres. Although it’s unclear to what extent this has affected the sector, gaming revenues hit nearly $110 billion in 2017, dwarfing the film industry’s $38 billion.

So what if this could be replicated in the blockchain coding universe?

Above all, however, and rather counterintuitively, the decentralisation movement needs to become more coordinated in its efforts to create applications, both digital and real.

Once real usage arrives – which it will – then talk about challenging long-held technological principles can begin. If the intrinsic or manifest value of blockchain companies is able to rival that of today’s digital superpowers, then analysts, traders, enthusiasts or anyone can begin to compare facts with facts.

Anecdotes, stories and utopic visions are lovely and rightly endearing to mere mortals. But in the world of data, facts and evidence, they are trivial.

These developments will be enough to move the market towards stability, but there is still some way to go.