The link goes to a presentation, which is quite light on detail...
...the company did say the total cost would be offset by the rise in property values... Homes built nearby would be worth more
Property values will only rise in the immediate vicinity of the station. Properties further away may also rise in value, but it depends on accessibility - and that will almost certainly require additional transport infrastructure, which is a cost on the city.
...freight shipments would arrive sooner...
Freight and people on the same line? Pretty sure Amtrak does that in the US, and it doesn't work out very well.
...workers traveling between the two cities would spend less time commuting and more time working.
"We've said that, generally speaking, a Hyperloop system can be built at 50 [percent] to 60 [percent] of the cost of high-speed rail because Hyperloop technology requires less intensive civil engineering, its levitated vehicles produce fewer maintenance issues and its electric propulsion occupies far less of the track than high-speed rail," the company says
Spoken like someone who's never built anything.