That is true, and I do think that the first alternative I suggested of having several members as tenants and then a layer of institutional membership for use of the common area is more realistic.
That number 65 is also based on trying to low-ball the monthly commitment from organizations to $100 a month. If those organizations would be willing to agree to more in return for more access, that would be great.
Also, the common area space isn't all that big, true, but keep in mind that in regards to holding meetings, mini conferences, parties, movie showings - each of these has different requirements. And there's a bunch of different rooms that would allow many things to be going on at once, as has already begun but under scrunched circumstances in the Sudo Room common area as of late. Remember, in regards to the hypothetical scenario of 65 groups - they would all have access to all of the rooms on that floor. That is in comparison to the current situation where only 2 of 7 units are being rented,
I do think it is more likely to have 6-8 entities being tenants in one of the 7 rooms in that wing and that they would get first dibs on common room space in case of a schedule conflict. I threw out 15-30% as the amount of full rent that would be subsidized by the common room area access level of membership. I'll let someone else do the calculations.
65 groups sounds like quite a large number to be sharing one physical place that isn't all that big. That means each group gets less than half a day's use of each room? Assuming it were shared perfectly equally I mean.