As unfortunate as it may be, I believe Mr. Bruce has 'nailed it' again [my emphases]:
When you start to speak or write, you have to have an idea of audience, or in more modern terms, market. Who's going to buy what you're selling? Does Msgr Steenson even have an idea of what his market is like? You can say "Anglicans", but that's a little like trying to sell cars to "drivers". Most Anglicans are happy as bugs where they are. What's probably the biggest and most successful Anglo-Catholic strain is urban, gay-accepting Episcopal parishes. I was a member of one for ten years or so. In my view, the Holy Spirit is present there, and they have their own destinies to work out, but by and large, they're on the same page with present TEC leadership. They aren't going to become Catholic anytime soon.
Then there's the broad spectrum across TEC, ACNA, and some "continuers" -- they may see value in being Protestant and find some aspects of Catholicism even somewhat unpretty or repellent. (There were things I had to get over in my own journey.) They're a hard sell at best. These people might be seen, from the Ordinariate's perspective, as various kinds of unsuitable ground for the sower.
Among other "continuers", there are people who are just plain angry, and their anger is as much anti-Catholic as anti-TEC. These include David Virtue and some "continuers" like Michael Gill. Thorny ground indeed.
There are sentimental Anglo-Catholics who like vestments and trips to Rome, but don't strike me as solid people who can build a community under stress. These include the madwomen who wear velvet hats to church and the guys who used to run Anglo-Catholic cheerleading blogs. I assume the pretty picture of St Peter's on the Ordinariate home page is aimed at this group, and frankly, it's an indication to me of how little the Houston clique understands the market. These people are stony ground without much earth.