[rajeshpant]

People don't mind paying a small incentive to cut travel time. I don't have analytics data to prove this, but this is how generally people book flights when searching on expedia or any other website:

1. Search flights from A to B, show me the cheapest flights. 2. Then comes time preference(Should fly Friday instead of thursday? morning vs evening) 3. filter results by least no. of hops(This definitely shows people want to cut down on flying time and most people still pay an incentive to reach their destination faster).

I feel the world and society had many changes since 60s, 70s. People today are more interested in reaching their destination fast and can pay a small premium. This is a change in economics since the Concorde time. People who are paying for Business class and First class, would prefer paying a premium and reaching the destination faster.

People would still want cheap, reliable aircrafts and they should have that option but supersonic commercial flights on certain trans pacific & trans atlantic routes is definitely feasible.

Concorde had high maintenance costs - it required special fuel, special tires and other maintainence costs which made it financially non-viable. If any new supersonic flight addresses these costs, then it will open a whole new world of faster air travel.

[jonknee]

Opposing evidence: carriers continually find new ways to show a lower price and then make it back up in fees (like some US carriers charging for carry on luggage). This is specifically because people sort by price.

[lucasverra]

> (This definitely shows people want to cut down on flying time and most people still pay an incentive to reach their destination faster)

As we are going with anecdata I will complete :

- it's not that i care that much of time when choosing stops, I care about consistent awful airport processes. Just getting off the plane is painfull ("Common people get off quicker pleaase")