Does the building make money from it?
Under one model you are paid rent for the space. Under the other you keep the revenue and carry the cost. Both are real; they are not the same bet.
Yes, in one of two quite different ways, and which one suits you has more to do with your appetite for capital than with the building.
Paid for the space
The provider funds, owns, stocks and operates everything, and pays the property at or above the market rent for the footprint it occupies, with the largest premium on the smallest footprints. Predictable, independent of how busy the hub gets, and with no capital at risk. The income is modest by design: you are letting floor area, not running a business.
Keeping the revenue
The property funds the build and keeps what the hub earns from rentals and retail, paying the provider for the equipment, the software and the service. More upside, and the usual consequence of more upside: you carry the demand risk, and the return depends on whether your residents actually use it.
The comparison that gets skipped
Against a dedicated amenity room, both options look good, because a room earns nothing and costs floor area. The comparison worth running is against simply letting the space, if it is lettable. In most lobbies it is not, which is why this works.
Be careful with projections
Revenue models for a building that does not have one of these yet are estimates, including ours. Ask which inputs they rest on, check them against your own unit count and resident profile, and treat the output as a scenario rather than a forecast.
Get this answered for your building
A proposal states which figures are contractual and which are estimates, in writing.