It is really going to come down to how much they can reduce the sonic boom. Supposedly their aircraft will produce more of a rumble like distant thunder rather than a bang. If its at a level that's agreeable to both regulators and the public, that would open up all the overland routes the Concord could never do. If they can combine that with higher production numbers with a corresponding drop in unit, operating, and maintenance costs, they _may_ have a valid business model.
Looking at how many people rent (or own) business jets with five figure+ price tags per flight, I think there's definitely a market for premium tickets, especially if you can do say LAX to Heathrow in ~5 hours instead of 10.5 hours.
I really hope this isn't the kind of innovation where the company breaks the law and asks for forgiveness later. Like "oh the sonic boom is only slightly louder than Concord but really it's just a bunch of first nations people in Canada who are impacted and we are super rich and our time is so precious please just ignore these marginalized people and we promise we'll throw them a few bucks"
we share the same preferences, which is not to have our lives disrupted by sudden, loud, percussive sounds. There is a video from the 90s taken from a ship in the atlantic that shows how loud Concorde's sonic boom actually was, 40k feet below. you should watch it and ask if you would be ok with that sound throughout the day and night. not to mention how the wildlife could be affected.
Looking at how many people rent (or own) business jets with five figure+ price tags per flight, I think there's definitely a market for premium tickets, especially if you can do say LAX to Heathrow in ~5 hours instead of 10.5 hours.