That’s ’challenging’….
I don’t understand the strap button positions…
In a strange way that actually looks quite good! But the rather weird looking bridge doesn’t appear to have any intonation adjustment also not quite sure what it is; it only has four strings but they look too thin for a bass.
Good eye. 
This is actually a prototype of a Mahogany tenor ukulele, a custom.
However, the body/neck design could be adaptable for a bass build, assuming the addition of an adjustable bridge.
It’s actually a pretty clever way of creating a headless instrument using existing tech (tuning machines) rather than designing a whole new type of tuner.
It’s like someone took a look at a horseshoe crab and made a bass
Well, I don’t want a bass that looks like that, but it would be a pretty great starship design for Star Trek.
Looks Romulan 
That’s what I thought!
But isn’t the whole point of headless to have those specific headless tuners?
Don’t like the look of headless, but I do appreciate the principle, especially that you can just cut strings to size (would be great for short scale - using any string you like).
So this thing showed up on FB Marketplace (in BC, Canada)
Guy is asking 8000CAD…Here’s what he says in the ad: “This is a one-off build. There is no other similar bass! It is not a wall hanger, art piece. It is a player! It has been played by many and most find it almost comfortable sitting, and of course, great when standing. But it is heavy, 17.5 pounds.”
I am really at a loss for words here…
The Bullwinkle bass
Oh…Canada…no.
My goodness….!
I may be wrong but I don’t think that was the reason. I think those new style tuners are because they’re easier to put on the body than standard tuners would be (hence my comment on the cleverness of that ukulele). As I understand it the main reasons/justifications for headless basses and guitars is to reduce the overall weight and improve the balance. At least that was my understanding
