It will only be supported when Bkool open up their ANT+ protocol, i.e. it is in their hands! Trainer road in the past have stated they have no intention of reverse engineering the protocol in order to support it whilst Bkool maintain a closed system. Zwift have stated they will support the Bkool, if Bkool open up the protocol.
I'm not sure why Bkool would open up the protocol on a trainer that costs half the price of it's competitors? I was thinking about this and they appear to primarily be a software company that probably outsourced the design and manufacture of a trainer which they can sell at little profit to support their software platform, so they make money from the subscriptions and build up the customer base and momentum they need. They would be mad to open it up so it can be used with other software, so they make little on the trainer and nothing on the software.
If they did open it up they would have to charge for it, or make a more expensive model that was open, and keep the current models proprietary.
I expect the hardware engineers talked about supporting the ANT+ trainer protocol, I expect the accountants and marketing people overruled them!
I hope to be surprised, but businesses rarely do something which would so clearly be damaging to their own business.
If people stop buying the trainers because they are closed, and buy open ones, then bkool will hope to gain some of those as customers for the software platform, and will probably not miss the small margin from the lost trainer sale. In fact, if their trainer sales fell substantially, they would probably keep them closed and reduce the price as far as they can, to keep acquiring customers for their software platform. That's what I would do ...
Geoff