I would call that a flying tricycle.

Cool as hell, but a tricycle.

Interesting-- it's an autogyro! They had a brief surge of popularity in the 20's and 30's.

As with the amphibious cars, they're trying to combine two very different sets of demands in one vehicle. As Dr. Johnson wrote: "It is not done well; but you are surprised to find it done at all."

OK, that's really stupid. Where's mine?

You can buy a very used 2-seat production airplane for around $20K, last time I was looking. If this costs less than $150k I'll eat my hat.

Here's a more "conventional" flying car.
http://www.terrafugia.com/

As a former pilot, I don't see a great benefit to this idea. For the money you can get a better used aircraft and 2 lifetimes worth of car rentals when needed. For the cost of a Terrafugia you can get a sweet and modern Cirrus, or whatever Cessna calls it now, with fancy electronics and a ballistic recovery parachuts. They even have a magic button to make the airplane fly straight and level should the pilot become disoriented.

It's all chitty and no bang bang.

One advantage to the autogyro, supposedly, is that if the engine conks out you can come to a feathered landing because the overhead prop will keep rotating.

It seems that all these "modern" attempts at creating the flying car are unclear on the concept.

The whole idea is NOT to have something that can travel on the roads and also fly, but something that can FLY, but have car-like user friendliness.

You fly it to wherever your destination is, but you can land it in a parking lot. The old-timers got that, but the newbies are wasting time and effort on a non-starter.

Don't forget the Moller SkyCar. That's probably the closest to the sci-fi fantasy.

the Moller SkyCar

I haven't, but that concept has had about as much luck as practical fusion. It's been around so long that it doesn't count as a recent effort, and it does fulfill the criteria I outlined above.