Try it out and let us know!
On the other hand, I don't buy that video at all. You put anything remotely edible looking inside an aquarium of hungry bass and these fish will eat it

Video looks staged (ie...at an aquarium...not a true fishing situation) so I would be more convinced if they actually show a video of a field test, side by side with other lures, and compare the catch rate with this Bombshell Turtle.
I can make a bass eat a cigarette butt if it is hungry enough or I irritate it enough.

I bet you that in the same tank of bass, if you toss in any other lure, they will hit anything and everything regardless. It's nothing more than marketing ploy
Here's how I would test it...
The test should be done on wild bass, with the same angler casting two identical rods, reels and line combo using two different lures (maybe a senko as the control and the Bombshell Turtle as the test).
The angler can give each lure a test by alternating between them along the same set of shorelines (ie, doing two drifts down the same shoreline), testing 6 locations throughout the day. Places where anglers had made casts should be recorded and fished again on the second drift, regardless of whether the angler caught fish there or not (it could very well be there the fish are not responding to one lure vs. another).
To make it fair, each lure would get the opportunity to be fished on the first first at 3 of 6 locations (since often the first edible thing a fish sees will more likely be hit). So, for Spot A, Turtle fished on first drift, then Senko fished on the second drift on the same shoreline. For Spot B, Senko on first drift and Turtle on second drift...so on and so forth. This gives equal opportunity for the lure to be tested with virgin approach or as a follow up presentation on the second approach.
Just trying to be a voice of reason. I do experiments every day...and when something doesn't seem experimentally right, I do speak up.
