The fact is, that the blockchains use as a true universal decentralised ledger as a means of asset exchange will bring more value to cryptocurrency than anything else. The ability to have an unforgeable, easily transferred certificate/token is priceless.
Some have theorised that using a blockchains ledger as a means of asset exchange means that the blockchains market cap will have to remain higher than the value of all assets flowing through it at any given time.
If this works, and sets off new innovation and reactions from the right folk, we are seeing steps towards a decentralised stock exchange, housing market etc within the current landscape.
We love our BTC and crypto, but introducing asset exchange or a true backing would be an event that could move USD value of BTC to 10k and beyond with ease, along with BTC becoming a true commodity, and not having to feel like a total neckbeard when you bring it up at a social gathering
so, my initial question would be, if the OP had the means to link cryptocurrencies to a real world product, why didn't he/she just pair it with BTC in the first place. Why the need for another new altcoin to do so? One could easilly have marked up the value of 1 MT of Urea to #x-amount-of-BTC, with variable rates according to the market value of BTC.
It remains a far ball to catch that 1URO = 1MT Urea; especially when the toy-exhcanges will allow anyone to command the price.
It is always possible to wail on about VALUE, but it's PRICE that people see when they open up their browsers.