The ONLY way the mach .95 "Sonic Cruiser" can be economically viable, is if the operating costs are "close" to the operating costs of a similarly sized mach .84 aircraft. I'm convinced that the ticket price differential cannot be very much in order for this aircraft to be profitable for Boeing. I'm somewhat aware of the engineering challenges involved to accomplish this cost of operation at mach .95, and if Boeing is able to achieve this, then they will have a clear winner on their hands.
I feel however that the best market niche for this aircraft is the long haul point-to-point market. The speed advantage is too small on short flights to make the aircraft distinguishable from existing aircraft serving those markets. The Charter market is very cost sensitive as well as a good portion of the regular tourist market. The business market will pay a small premium for the speed advantage, and a sizable portion of the tourist market would also I believe.
But here's something that's interesting, suppose this aircraft works as advertised, and the speed increase happens at little or no increase in direct operating costs. What existing Boeing aircraft will this new airplane replace? The 767? No problem here, as the 767 has recently become a very slow seller. What will it do to the existing 777 market? Boeing spent a huge sum in the last decade developing this brand new aircraft. Should Boeing obsolete the 777 by the end of this decade with a family variant of the "Sonic Cruiser" in the 777's size and range class? Again I think the main strength of this new aircraft will be on long range point-to-point routes, where the speed advantage can be seen and felt most clearly.
Bottom line, the operating costs have to be close to existing aircraft, or the market for this airplane will be very small. I think many of the airline CEOs have made a number of statements to this affect.
Sorry guys, it's the bean counter in me.
------------------
Safe flying to you...