The model doesn't make sense the way they presented it. If you simply return the money that would have gone towards paying off the building, then how does the

The model doesn't make sense the way they presented it. If you simply return the money that would have gone towards paying off the building, then how does the cooperative grow and acquire more properties? If the cooperative acquires new properties via loans to rent out, then the cooperative has committed itself to the mortgage, but the tenant has not. Not just that, but the cooperative has to return almost the entire principal, meaning that it would have to sell the property to clear the debt the moment a tenant leaves. I'm not saying this model can't work. It could work under two restrictions: 1. If you want to move out, you must find a tenant to succeed you. If you want to cash out, you can sell your shares to the new tenant at a discount. 2. You can only use your shares for renting another property or transfer your shares to a different housing cooperative. With these two rules the cooperatives won't be stuck with stranded real estate and the cooperative network grows over time.