"in my view, by far the most effective thing is independent developers recommending us. " 
Ashley
This statement holds true but for that, you have to make the marketing right.
BEEN USING C3 FOR YEARS HERE IS MY HONEST ANALYSIS WHAT'S WRONG WITH SCIRRA?
On other day, I was watching a video on YouTube with around 3 million views. In the video, the dude discussed how he had created the same game using many different game engines. When it came to Construct 3, the dude was impressed by how the no-code engine was easy to use and based on the browser. However, he concluded that C3 is very lightweight and is best suited for smaller projects and prototypes.
I was initially shocked at his ignorance, if he just opened the example project from c3, he would have been shocked, at how capable the engine is, but then I realized it wasn't entirely his fault. There is something fundamentally wrong with how C3, that how it presents itself.
It markets itself as a no-code engine, but in reality, it's not true. C3 does involve a fair amount of programming. If you don't have much programming knowledge and start using C3, you may face difficulty initially but if you continue, you'll end up not just learning how to use C3, but at the same time, gaining knowledge about programming, many different aspects of programming, which helps you tremendously in future if you pursue your career on that direction. (C3 does this brilliantly, and I have yet to see another engine that does it as effectively as C3 does with its event system).
I have an interesting case study about TATA Motors (which owns Jaguar and Land Rover), which I believe will help illustrate my thoughts better.
In 2009, TATA Motors introduced the world's most affordable car, called the TATA Nano, which was launched at ₹1 lakh, at that time. The news spread like wildfire, with media outlets worldwide covering it extensively. The buzz was overwhelmingly positive, and the stock price of the TATA Group went crazy. Everyone expected this to be a revolutionary product for the group. The early reviews were also somewhat positive.
However, when the car hit the roads, Despite mostly positive reviews, the TATA NANO project was deemed a failure.
You might wonder why. What went wrong?
Well, It's because of the fundamental nature of human psychology. People often consider a car as a symbol of luxury and status. When you associate a luxury symbol with affordability, it doesn't sit right with people. They'd rather buy a used car at the same price than purchase a new car that everyone knows is the world's most affordable car. So when people see you driving this car, they assume since you don't have that much money that's why you bought this, the world's most affordable car.
So, coming back to the Construct 3, a no-code, event sheet interface, and a browser-based powerful game engine are excellent traits of C3 but these traits can be a double-edged sword. If you take a closer look, you'll realize that Scirra is doing something similar with C3 what TATA did with the Nano.
In general, people who know programming tend to brag about it. If you say that you made a game using C3, due to C3's marketing, people assume that you don't know much about programming and that's why you chose C3. I think this is why some dedicated developers tend to disregard C3. When they do end up using C3, they often don't openly share it with the public. I've even witnessed games created with C3 that display the Unity splash screen.
Scirra a small start-up based in London made a fantastic game engine that can challenge a billion-dollar-backed game engine anytime, but did not get enough recognition which it truly deserves due to its poor marketing.