"An all first-class 100 seat configuration might serve Concorde-type clientele on selected routes when Concordes reach the end of their operational lives." You're kidding, right? A Mach 0.95 airplane replacing a Mach 2 airplane. People who pay to be able to fly the Atlantic both ways in a day will pay a Concorde-type premium to shave 45-75 minutes off their journey time?
By the time the poor thing's struggled up to 45,000 and then back, with the climb and descent micro-managed by ATC, and not optimised for speed or fuel efficiency, it may even end up slower than a 340 whose operators have got their check-in and baggage claim systems properly streamlined.
"A successfully designed and cost-competitive sonic cruiser would seem to be a stake into the heart of the long-term A-340 market." Only if it can offer lower seat mile costs, and there's no suggestion that it will. This misbegotten aircraft (if not actually intended as a joke) represents the worst possible compromise between bold innovation and cautious conservatism. It won't be radical enough to carve a high speed niche, and it won't be cheap enough to compete - and on top of all that it looks too radical for accountants and passengers.
The Seattle Post Intelligencer. There's a good, reliable, impartial source for info on the local industry.
If the company is right in its claim to be able to produce an efficient jetliner that can cruise just under the speed of sound, they have NOT conquered a problem that has baffled airplane designers since the dawn of the jet age, they've re-invented the VC10 and the CV990, and have had to enter Dan Dare design territory to do so.