What would you have liked to see differently in the article? More explanation? More examples? I would have written a more technical article, but it probably wouldn't have been the best fit for ComputerWeekly.
You're selling a technical product which many people don't understand the need for, leaving the details out puts you in a place where you make vague and unsupported statements, the real answer to that is going to be refining your messages over and over until they get good.
Developing back end systems that provide an API over a relational, object or graph db has been a big part of what I do for the last decade. I don't think the coding is particularly difficult but there is a lot of it. I count 135 tables on the system I am working on today and there are more views, foreign tables, and other objects in that database. If there is a special challenge it's that an API like that always has some cross cutting concerns such as authentication, authorization, logging, data integrity and such.
Because it is such a big job it would be rational to say a 20% improvement in development time would be impactful (save two months a year) but it's a tough sell because of the cost and risk of transitioning the system and/or trying something new.
On one level I'm enthusiastic about low/no code products that are ontology driven but most of us have the experience that, someday, a system like that will answer you "you can't get to there from here". So that's more work for you to overcome.
Examples and specific details are important. A business-driven example would be good to see, so would be a more technical example where your product vastly simplifies the code. I'd love to see testimonials by engineers or managers about the troubles they have with the status quo and how your product helps. (There is always the horror story of the API that was implemented w/o proper access controls.)
That's what we are looking to achieve with Tigris.