“bytdwd” has no word divider; it could be a place name or a temple name rather than “House of David.” And even if it is David’s dynasty, that only shows a ninth-century kingdom claimed descent from a David.

Both points are fair and should stay visible. The House of David reading is accepted by the large majority of epigraphers because house of X is the standard Aramaic and Assyrian way of naming a dynasty, the parallel king of Israel appears in the same inscription, and no place called Beth-Dod is otherwise attested. On the second point, the stele is offered only as evidence for David’s dynasty, which is exactly what it shows: within about 130 years of David’s traditional dates, an enemy king recognized a Judahite royal house named after him. That is what you would expect if David existed, and not what you would expect if he was invented centuries later.