Of course, he does mention in the description of the video that the Autoflex still needs to be wetsanded and polished, so the end product may look quite good. At that point though, the installer is doing quite a bit of work - masking/taping, applying 14 coats, cure time, then wetsanding and polishing. The only difference between an actual paint job at this point is panel removal. When you factor in the amount of time that the car has to sit in the booth and the shop rate of a reputable installer, it's hard to understand how all of that could cost less than a PPF installation, especially if the PPF being applied is a pre-cut kit.
That said, if you have an Autoflex installer who can do all of the required work, get it to come out as good as a PPF application, and provide the same amount of protection (i.e. adds a 5-8 mil thick layer of protection against rock chips and such) for less than the cost of PPF, and you can make do without your car for the added downtime, I would definitely deem it to be a viable alternative. It just doesn't seem possible unless the installer is significantly lowering their $/hr rate.
