I think the first thing is to congratulate the inventor on bringing innovation to the drum industry. I get the advantages of this system. Working on purely sympathetic resonance between two surfaces in variable proximity offers a level of control that just can't be matched with a conventional shell arrangement. For close mic PA work, this could work very well. Equally, I can see real benefit in demo studio "house kit" applications where setup time is limited and source control is a priority over individual sound.
As an acoustic proposition, I think it falls well short of the mark. The lack of complete shell severely limits sustain possibility and reduces projection. Essentially, the kit becomes an over complicated set of flats. Adjusting the distance between the two head assemblies does alter the sound, but not necessarily in a way you'd want to. I don't like the characterless nature of the product in an acoustic environment.
I believe the market for this is very limited. Maybe novelty purchace, and the two applications I mentioned above. Innovation is a great thing. I hold many patents myself (non drum related) & some of them are commercially successful, so I'm a big fan of progression. I love the saying, "the only way to predict the future is to invent it". All that said, innovation for innovation's sake is heartbreak just waiting to happen. There has to be a market demand for a product to take off and equal some sort of critical mass. Either that, or a market need is created by the invention itself. That's rare, & usually very expensive. To bring a new concept to market, you have to be a problem solver. "Give me a problem, & I'll show you a business" is my personal saying. My problem with this product is, I don't see the problem it's trying to solve.