If you follow the cryptocurrency industry, you’ve probably heard of a project called Filecoin. In 2017, Filecoin’s parent company raised $205 million to build a new type of digital storage network. The network would use tokens and blockchain technology to store data on millions of computers around the world.

Three years later, Filecoin does not have a product, but it does have a legal headache. Its venture capital investors are accusing the project’s leaders of selling off digital tokens—the blockchain version of shares—that should belong to them. The dispute is reportedly in mediation, while a spokesperson for Filecoin tells Fortune that “we do not comment on our private discussions with specific shareholders.”

Filecoin is hardly the only blockchain project having problems. In the go-go days of 2017 and early 2018, dozens of crypto firms raised absurd amounts of money in “initial coin offerings” that sold digital tokens to all comers via the Internet. In theory, consumers would one day use the tokens to purchase services on the blockchain projects—while the promise of future value made the tokens a hot target for speculators.

In reality, it’s been almost all speculation. Blockchain companies like Bancor and Paragon raised hundreds of millions to transform industries like market-making and cannabis, but have yet to produce anything of value, and the prices of their tokens have collapsed. If these projects had been traditional Silicon Valley startups, their crackups would have produced howls of outrage from investors and blaring headlines in the business press.

The case of Filecoin is especially troubling since, unlike many of the fly-by-night token projects, it is led by a respected team and has the support of A-list venture capitalists. It’s too soon to count the company out—Filecoin could still surprise us and disrupt Microsoft and Amazon Web Services—but the more time elapses without a viable product, the less likely it is that Filecoin will become anything more than a cautionary tale.

All of this raises the question of what went wrong with these blockchain companies. After all, it was just three years ago that a viral essay predicted that the sale of tokens would democratize finance and disrupt the venture capital firms of Silicon Valley. Today, VC firms are still firmly in control, while most people see token investments as akin to Venezuelan bonds or Florida swamp land.

One reason for this is that new technologies like blockchain are hard, and that—like driverless cars or virtual reality—there will be a lot of failures along the way. It took years for the Internet economy to take off, and it’s not realistic to expect projects like Filecoin, which involve an immense amount of work and novel infrastructure, to succeed overnight.

But there is another reason to be skeptical, and that is the lack of incentive that blockchain companies have to succeed. In the case of a traditional startup, founders receive a small pot of money and scramble ferociously to build a product and raise more cash to keep going. Meanwhile, a board of experienced investors guides their progress—and can pull the plug if that progress is too slow.

Contrast that with founders who conduct an initial coin offering. Suddenly, these founders are awash in gobs of money with few strings attached, leaving them under no particular pressure to follow through on their plans. Even those who launch blockchain companies with the best intentions (they are likely in the minority) will struggle to stay motivated. Why toil over blockchain code all day when you can travel the world enjoying your millions?

This does not mean that every blockchain company that sold tokens is doomed. There are bright spots in the token economy, including Tezos, which raised over $200 million in 2017 and, despite early controversies, has built a popular network for smart contracts. Meanwhile, it’s not too late for Filecoin to turn it around and dazzle the world with a product—but it had better get going soon.