This system seems interesting but I just don't think it would be as effective as a traditional linear light mover. You're rotating over the same location so you are getting more light penetration, but aside from using the single spinner (as opposed to 2-6 spinners they have) it seems like you're just wasting money. The single spinning unit would increase the area you're covering marginally, but if you have 2 or more lights on the same spinner it's just redundant and you're covering the same area just twice as often.
I cant see this being more effective than a linear rail system. What would be much more interesting is this technology applied to rotating the plants themselves so that each side of the plant receives ample time exposed to lighting.
Keep in mind the site also states that a 1000w attached to this system grants an effective 1200w of coverage on the same space, so the real question is whether or not the initial expense, the operating costs, and the upkeep of the unit itself is actually cheaper than the theoretical 20% increase in yield. Considering these seem to be literally just modified ceiling fans I really doubt the cost is worth the improvement. These motors are designed to spin extremely light weight fan blades and typically (from my experience with ceiling fans at my old apartment and friends homes) units last anywhere from 3-5 years before the motor burns out or you start having to replace components. The additional weight of lights would be enough to shorten the lifespan of these motors significantly (also the single light unit is ridiculously imbalanced unless there is some sort of counterweight that I havent been seeing on their website) which is going to warp the drive shaft and shorten the lifespan of the unit even further.
I'm interested to see the actual cost/yield statistics, but for my money I'll be sticking with traditional movers for now.