I think, and this is what emerges from the publications that I cited, that the cosine loss applies for all systems, and depends on the elevation angle: the higher it is, the higher the cosine loss.
This is understandable even intuitively: the wind exerts a force or power on a horizontal vector. The less the AWES is aligned to this force, the more the elevation angle increases, the more the AWES loses by the cosine becoming lower. This does not seem to depend on the aerodynamic characteristics of the AWES, but on its alignment with the wind direction. A typical wind turbine is perfectly aligned to receive wind perpendicular to the rotor disk without cosine loss.
The passage you cited does not seem to call into question this cosine law, but it mentions differences in terms of aerodynamic characteristics.
To return more precisely to the topic, I find that the winch system of Wind Fisher is very ingenious to allow all possible and imaginable maneuvers while ensuring reeling phases. In particular changing the direction of rotation or even stopping it, while the lines are lengthened or shortened, is one of the numerous possibilities.
The patent could also advantageously apply to not crosswind or crosswind vertical trajectory (in addition to crosswind eight-figure such as practiced by Wind Fisher). For a balloon like Omnidea’s, this would allow to avoid rotation motors aloft and the requirement of electric cable from the ground station to the motors. Similar for giant balloons.
For lower performances (and again if this is verified during the tests for vertical trajectory compared to horizontal eight-figure such like practiced) we could additionally have these last two balloons entirely supported by the lines which surround them in several places, without requiring a fixed structure which imposes a rotational movement of the balloon relative to said fixed structure. The patent also covers these configurations.