The honest autopsy: What killed WeLive, Common, PodShare, and 30+ others—$50M+ in losses, early warning signs you can't ignore, and the mistakes that destroy communities
Between 2015-2024, the coliving industry raised $1B+ in venture capital. WeWork dumped hundreds of millions into WeLive. Brookfield invested $90M in Common. Investors bet big on "the future of housing."
Then reality hit. WeLive shut down all locations. Common burned through cash and sold. PodShare closed half its properties. Smaller operators disappeared overnight, leaving residents scrambling. Failure rate for coliving startups: 67% within first 3 years (industry estimates).
This isn't FUD—it's pattern recognition. Every failure leaves lessons. This guide breaks down what actually kills communities, the early warning signs operators miss, and how to avoid becoming another cautionary tale.
Here are the highest-profile failures—with specific numbers on what went wrong.
Don't scale before profitability. WeLive had 2 locations losing money and planned 20+ more. That's not growth—that's multiplying failure.
Fixed costs kill flexibility. Master leases work in boom times, not recessions. If you can't weather 6 months at 50% occupancy, your model is too fragile.
Niche is risky. Hostel-style coliving works for 5% of renters. When that 5% disappears (COVID), you have no backup market. Build for broader appeal or die when trends shift.
While others burned cash and collapsed, PadSplit quietly became profitable—here's what they're doing differently.
WeLive built for millennials who "want community." PadSplit builds for workers who need affordable housing. Need > Want.
Common master-leased properties = fixed costs. PadSplit takes % of rent = costs scale with revenue. Platform beats ownership.
Everyone chased SF/NYC/LA. PadSplit went to Atlanta, Memphis, Birmingham—lower costs, higher margins, less competition.
Raised $22M vs. Common's $90M. Grew slowly, hit profitability, THEN scaled. Others scaled losses.
Scan to Join PadSplit
Want to List Your Property on a Platform That Actually Works?
Join 1,600+ property owners earning 18-22% cash-on-cash returns with PadSplit's proven model
Become a PadSplit HostNo master lease risk • Asset-light model • Proven 85% occupancy
| Factor | Failed Models (WeLive, Common) | PadSplit Model |
|---|---|---|
| Target Market | Millennials seeking "lifestyle" ($2,000-4,000/mo) | Working-class needing affordability ($500-900/mo) |
| Revenue Model | Rent collection (master lease risk) | 12-15% platform fee (no property risk) |
| Cost Structure | High fixed costs ($65/sq ft operating) | Variable costs (scale with revenue) |
| Geographic Focus | Expensive coastal cities (NYC, SF, LA) | Affordable Sun Belt cities (ATL, Memphis) |
| Capital Efficiency | $90M+ raised, burned through it | $22M raised, achieved profitability |
| Marketing Pitch | "Community lifestyle" (aspirational) | "Affordable housing solution" (practical) |
| Unit Economics | Negative at launch, hoped to fix later | Positive from Day 1 (landlord pays fee) |
| COVID Impact | Destroyed (fixed leases, premium pricing) | Thrived (demand for affordability increased) |
Successful operators establish credibility from day one. Own your .coliving domain forever—learn from failures, build for success.
Every failed coliving space makes at least 3 of these mistakes. Avoid them or join the graveyard.
Opening location #2 before location #1 is profitable. "We'll figure out profitability later" = death sentence.
Signing 5-10 year master leases with fixed rent = betting you can ALWAYS fill units. One recession and you're toast.
Building for "digital nomads" or "Gen Z creatives" = 5% of renters. When that niche shifts, you have no backup audience.
Charging $2,500+/month when target demo can only afford $1,200. "Lifestyle premium" doesn't justify 2x market rate.
Focusing on "beds filled" instead of "how long they stay." 95% occupancy with 35% retention is a failing business.
Either no CM (chaos, conflicts escalate) or inexperienced CM (makes problems worse). Community doesn't "just happen."
Raising $50M+, expanding aggressively, assuming "scale solves everything." Then market shifts and runway runs out.
If you checked 4+ boxes: Your community is in critical condition. You have 3-6 months to fix unit economics or shut down gracefully. Do NOT scale. Fix profitability first or you're multiplying failure.
While others scramble with generic domains, smart operators secure their .coliving brand identity. Be a winner, not a cautionary tale.
Common, WeLive didn't secure digital assets early. Don't repeat their mistakes.
PadSplit built strong brand. Your .coliving domain is foundational infrastructure.
One payment, lifetime ownership. No risk of losing your domain to expired renewal.
Powered by freename.com • Instant availability & pricing
Most Coliving Businesses Fail—But They Don't Have To
The difference between WeLive ($400M lost) and PadSplit (profitable) isn't luck—it's unit economics, market fit, and operational discipline. WeLive scaled before profitability. PadSplit proved the model, THEN scaled. WeLive built luxury for imagined demand. PadSplit built affordability for real need.
The Survival Playbook (Do These or Die)
Coliving isn't dead—but the VC-funded, growth-at-all-costs model is. The future belongs to operators who solve real problems (affordability, flexibility) with sustainable economics. Build slow, stay profitable, or become another cautionary tale.
The Golden Rule of Coliving
"If your model doesn't work at 1 location, it won't work at 10. If you can't be profitable at 50% occupancy, you're one recession away from bankruptcy. Build for survival first, scale second."
Learn the strategies that actually work: retention frameworks, conflict resolution, event ROI, and community economics.