I agree that there's a great deal of potential here,and that the technology is really interesting.
And you're right that Beanie Babies are not the correct comparison, since they are difficult to use as a medium of exchange.
One problem however with Bitcoin that I haven't yet seen addressed by any of the cryptocurrencies is the uniqueness problem. Fiat currencies are unique by definition -- this is the only currency that's mandated as legal tender in this particular country. Linden Dollars are the only medium of exchange on the Linden Marketplace.
Bitcoin's technology is open source and, as Dogecoin and Litecoin and the dozens (maybe hundreds by now) of various imitators are showing there is really little obstacle to setting up another, similar currency.
What makes one of these currencies preferable to another? Bitcoin, because it's the oldest? Litecoin, because it has some security improvements? Dogecoin, because it's attached to a cute meme? Ripple? Peercoin? Sexcoin? Hobo Nickels? If it's based on an open standard, then anyone can create a duplicate system based on the same technology and let it loose into the wild.
Is it based on the network backing it? If there are no switching costs, then the network is no guarantee of safety, no matter how large.
I'm not saying that these are insurmountable problems. They might be overcome.
But they haven't been overcome yet. Which is why I'm saying that, right now, investments in Bitcoin or similar alternative currencies are orders of magnitude riskier than investments in almost any other asset class.