Yup.
IMO, one mistake many people make is...because they enjoy "Reboling" and the art of it...they get over enthusiastic about skeleton crew projects...and try to use them for everything. This has helped push the boundaries--but also complicates the optics.
If you are trying to solve a problem on a timeline, there are much larger communities with better documentation and libraries than either Rebol or Red. And if you have professional obligations, using a more mainstream language is going to lessen your stress in the long run. Also, I'm not personally sure the ideas behind Rebol can actually be made to "work" (for my definition of "work") I'm referring there, to how the binding model operates.
UPDATE: Since this thread in 2018, leaps and bounds of progress have been made in the binding model, so I am much more optimistic.
Globally speaking, this is a small number of people working on a kind of nutty idea. I like Haskell too, for completely different reasons and principles (that are actually a lot less nutty, it's a more obvious thing). But I'd similarly tell an entrepreneur "don't bet the farm on Haskell, just because it seems like good magic". I've seen people regret that decision also.
Yet Red and Rebol can be a useful tool, even if you're not using them for everything. So my advice is to model it more that it's like a coding Swiss Army Knife. Learn PARSE and see how you like writing little tools just for yourself, before you go hog wild trying to build a web service or killer cross-platform mobile app. Use it a bit before you decide what it is good for and not good for.
Once you start tinkering, you might find yourself asking why you can't use it for other things...even if it doesn't fit yet. As Carl said:
A friend of mine says it's like the movie "Matrix" where you are offered either the red pill or the blue pill. Most programmers stick with the blue pill. The folks who take the REBOL red pill wake up and can never go back. I've had companies call me to complain that a few of their programmers started using REBOL and are now "ruined" because they refuse to go back. REBOL is a highly disruptive technology.
Really I think Rebol/Red would be better served if people didn't ask so much, so soon. What's wrong with small successes, built to larger ones? It's a big world, not every project must reach the moon on day one. Or year 18. 
Errr... I've never gone on the record, when it comes to timelines or promises or anything. Ren-C has always been a research project. Red is the project that kept saying a lot of (unrealistic) drop points.
I said I was going to try and attack some technical problems. I solved some of them. I'm proud of some designs and confident about them, I feel nervous about others ("was that right?")...and I also have other things to do in life--as most people do. It's great and validating to have Atronix on board, but they aren't in the language design business. They make a single product. So their timeline is all about that product, not about giving you a solution for writing mobile apps or whatever. If you can use it great, but be realistic here.
To summarize: no, nothing about Ren-C is about getting to any point faster than Red. It's about doing some things better, and hoping the community can convince Nenad that I actually did come up with good ideas, and adopt them.