Hrm - looks like snakeoil to me. Their diagram is basically showing a secondary coil that would "store" energy normally used up by heating the plug and components. The problem is that all of the same components are seeing current regardless of the plug used, and "When the ignition power overcomes the resistance in the spark gap, the pulse circuit discharges all of its accumulated power" is true for any spark plug. They are somehow claiming that their plug doesn't require current to be used for ionization before the spark can jump the gap, which is also BS
Once ignited, the flamefront speed is determined by cylinder pressure. I don't buy the "increased cylinder pressure" bit. I certainly don't buy the claimed performance gains unless the original plugs on the vehicle are in awful shape. If anything, the circuit in there would retard the ignition timing, which would make things worse. Also, their pretty graphs are completely nonsensical - "Normalised Ensemble Velocity"? They can't even spell!
The only point they do have is that your typical ignition timing is pretty variable, and a given cylinder can preignite or misfire quite often.
Spark plugs for $25 each?
They also pulled the same cheater trick that every other "mpg/pwr/trq enhancer" does of running the car normally first (a total of 30 miles "city", 60 miles "highway") and then swapping the plugs. The first part of the test, the car isn't even warmed up, and they're taking mpg data based on less than a tank of gas.
Lastly, their two "in the news" entries are a blurb in a skeezy magazine, and advertisement in popular science
I call shenanigans.