Coworking Europe Conference 2018, Amsterdam, Day 1 #CoworkingEU

1. 2018 GLOBAL COWORKING SURVEY
COWORKING IN EUROPE
COWORKING EUROPE, AMSTERDAM, NOVEMBER 14, 2018

2. LOCATION, AVERAGE MEMBER NUMBERS & SIZE OF COWORKING SPACES
≥ 1M INHABITANTS
< 1M - 500K INHABITANTS
< 100K INHABITANTS
< 500 - 100K INHABITANTS
25%
33%
27%
15%
-1 PP
-3 PP
+5 PP
DISTRIBUTION OF
COWORKING SPACES IN EUROPE
THE SHARE OF
COWORKING SPACES
IN MID-SIZED CITIES
HAS RISEN.

3. LOCATION, AVERAGE MEMBER NUMBERS & SIZE OF COWORKING SPACES
≥ 1M INHABITANTS
< 1M - 500K INHABITANTS
< 100K INHABITANTS
< 500 - 100K INHABITANTS
91
133
195
100
MEAN
MEDIAN
83
109
60
5% TRIMMED
MEAN
62
74
40
26
15
40
MEMBERS SQUARE METERS
168
42
25%
33%
27%
15%
+34
-1 PP
-3 PP
+23
+6
(65 +7)
1630
907
525
293
2950
1000
600
1700
360
890
230
390
+713
-25
(650 -30)
881 +212
THE CATEGORY < 1M - 100K INHABITANTS WAS SPLIT INTO TWO GROUPS IN 2018 FOR THE FIRST TIME. FOR THIS REASON, THOSE RESULTS CAN'T BE COMPARED WITH THE PREVIOUS YEAR.
THE SHARE OF
COWORKING SPACES
IN MID-SIZED CITIES
HAS RISEN.
AVERAGE MEMBER
NUMBERS ARE UP BY
A THIRD.
+5 PP
DISTRIBUTION OF
COWORKING SPACES IN EUROPE

4. LOCATION, AVERAGE MEMBER NUMBERS & SIZE OF COWORKING SPACES
≥ 1M INHABITANTS
< 1M - 500K INHABITANTS
< 100K INHABITANTS
< 500 - 100K INHABITANTS
91
133
195
100
MEAN
MEDIAN
83
109
60
5% TRIMMED
MEAN
62
74
40
26
15
40
MEMBERS SQUARE METERS
168
42
25%
33%
27%
15%
+34
-1 PP
-3 PP
+23
+6
(65 +7)
1630
907
525
293
2950
1000
600
1700
360
890
230
390
+713
-25
(650 -30)
881 +212
THE CATEGORY < 1M - 100K INHABITANTS WAS SPLIT INTO TWO GROUPS IN 2018 FOR THE FIRST TIME. FOR THIS REASON, THOSE RESULTS CAN'T BE COMPARED WITH THE PREVIOUS YEAR.
1
IS KING IN TERMS
OF AVERAGE MEMBER
NUMBERS (121) & THE
AVERAGE SIZE OF
SPACES (1400 SQM).
THE SHARE OF
COWORKING SPACES
IN MID-SIZED CITIES
HAS RISEN.
AVERAGE MEMBER
NUMBERS ARE UP BY
A THIRD.
+5 PP
DISTRIBUTION OF
COWORKING SPACES IN EUROPE

5. EUROPE
21%
25%GLOBAL
SHARE OF
PRIVATE OFFICES*
+7 PP
+6 PP
REVENUE SHARE
UP TO 22%
REVENUE SHARE
UP TO 27%*ARITHMETIC MEAN
BASIC CHARACTERISTICS OF COWORKING SPACES

6. EUROPE
21%
25%GLOBAL
SHARE OF
PRIVATE OFFICES*
+7 PP
+6 PP
REVENUE SHARE
UP TO 22%
REVENUE SHARE
UP TO 27%*ARITHMETIC MEAN
SHARE OF ENTITIES
WITH ONLY ONE
COWORKING SPACE
68%
AVERAGES OF NUMBER OF SPACES IN OPERATION:
5% TRIMMED: MEAN 1,8 -MEAN 3,3
CHAIN AVERAGES:
5% TRIMMED: MEAN 5,7 -MEAN 8,3
AVERAGES OF NUMBER OF SPACES IN OPERATION:
5% TRIMMED: MEAN 1,6 -MEAN 3,7
71%
-3 PP
0
BASIC CHARACTERISTICS OF COWORKING SPACES

7. BASIC CHARACTERISTICS OF COWORKING SPACES
EUROPE
21%
25%
84%
GLOBAL
SHARE OF
PRIVATE OFFICES*
+7 PP
+6 PP
REVENUE SHARE
UP TO 22%
REVENUE SHARE
UP TO 27%*ARITHMETIC MEAN
SHARE OF ENTITIES
WITH ONLY ONE
COWORKING SPACE
68%
AVERAGES OF NUMBER OF SPACES IN OPERATION:
5% TRIMMED: MEAN 1,8 -MEAN 3,3
CHAIN AVERAGES:
5% TRIMMED: MEAN 5,7 -MEAN 8,3
AVERAGES OF NUMBER OF SPACES IN OPERATION:
5% TRIMMED: MEAN 1,6 -MEAN 3,7
71%
-3 PP
0
81%
52%
6%
4%
58%
9%
4%
FOCUS STRONGLY ON COMPANIES WITH
< 10 10 - 100 > 100 EMPLOYEES
FOCUS STRONGLY ON COMPANIES WITH
< 10 10 - 100 > 100 EMPLOYEES
FOCUS STRONGLY
ON INDIVIDUAL
CUSTOMERS

8. LOCAL PARTNERS OF COWORKING SPACES
QUESTION: WHICH POTENTIAL PARTNER DO YOU WORK ON A LOCAL BASIS? WITHOUT N.A. IF ALL RESPONSE OPTIONS HAVE NOT BEEN CHOSEN:
17,5
35
52,5
70
PURPOSE LOCAL EDUCATIONAL LOCAL OTHER REAL NO PARTNERS
14%
23%
36%35%
41%45%
66%
13%15%
35%38%
45%48%
65%
EUROPE
GLOBAL
DRIVEN
ORGANIZATIONS
SERVICES ORGANIZATIONS COWORKING
SPACES
GOVERN-
MENT
ESTATE
FIRMS
PURPOSE-DRIVEN
ORGANIZATION
ARE THE MOST
POPULAR LOCAL
PARTNER OF
COWORKING
SPACES.

9. LOCAL PARTNERS OF COWORKING SPACES
QUESTION: WHICH POTENTIAL PARTNER DO YOU WORK ON A LOCAL BASIS? WITHOUT N.A. IF ALL RESPONSE OPTIONS HAVE NOT BEEN CHOSEN:
17,5
35
52,5
70
PURPOSE LOCAL EDUCATIONAL LOCAL OTHER REAL NO PARTNERS
14%
23%
36%35%
41%45%
66%
13%15%
35%38%
45%48%
65%
EUROPE
GLOBAL
DRIVEN
ORGANIZATIONS
LOCAL
GOVERNMENT
REAL ESTATE FIRMS
LOCAL GOVERNMENT
OTHER
COWORKING SPACES
NO PARTNERS
PURPOSE DRIVEN
ORGANIZATIONS
LOCAL SERVICES
LOCAL SERVICES
REAL ESTATE FIRMS
≥ 1M INHABITANTS < 1M - 100 K INHABITANTS > 100K INHABITANTS
EUROPE
ESTATE
FIRMS
= SHARE IS ABOVE AVERAGE
EDUCATIONAL SERVICES EDUCATIONAL SERVICES
OTHER
COWORKING SPACES
PURPOSE-DRIVEN
ORGANIZATION
ARE THE MOST
POPULAR LOCAL
PARTNER OF
COWORKING
SPACES.
SHARE OF LOCAL PARTNERS THAT ARE ABOVE-AVERAGE - BY NUMBER OF INHABITANTS IN EUROPE:
SERVICES ORGANIZATIONS COWORKING
SPACES
GOVERN-
MENT

10. AVERAGE DAILY EXPENDITURE OF MEMBERS NEARBY A COWORKING SPACE
€ 10

11. AVERAGE DAILY EXPENDITURE OF MEMBERS NEARBY A COWORKING SPACE
€ 10 PER MEMBER
& WORKING DAY

12. AVERAGE DAILY EXPENDITURE OF MEMBERS NEARBY A COWORKING SPACE
€ 10
... IF 100 MEMBERS WORK 5 TIMES A WEEK,
LOCAL SERVICES NEARBY RECEIVE...
PER MEMBER
& WORKING DAY

13. AVERAGE DAILY EXPENDITURE OF MEMBERS NEARBY A COWORKING SPACE
€ 10
€ 5 000
... IF 100 MEMBERS WORK 5 TIMES A WEEK,
LOCAL SERVICES NEARBY RECEIVE...
PER WEEK
PER MEMBER
& WORKING DAY

14. AVERAGE DAILY EXPENDITURE OF MEMBERS NEARBY A COWORKING SPACE
€ 10
€ 20 000
... IF 100 MEMBERS WORK 5 TIMES A WEEK,
LOCAL SERVICES NEARBY RECEIVE...
PER MONTH
PER MEMBER
& WORKING DAY
(BASED ON 20 WORKING DAYS PER MONTH)

15. AVERAGE DAILY EXPENDITURE OF MEMBERS NEARBY A COWORKING SPACE
€ 10
€ 240 000
... IF 100 MEMBERS WORK 5 TIMES A WEEK,
LOCAL SERVICES NEARBY RECEIVE...
PER MEMBER
& WORKING DAY
(BASED ON 240 WORKING DAYS PER YEAR)PER YEAR

16. €
AVERAGE DAILY EXPENDITURE OF MEMBERS NEARBY A COWORKING SPACE
EURO-ZONE
!
"
#
9
€
GERMANY
FRANCE
10
€
ITALY
12
€
$
5 % TRIMMED MEAN - RESULTS ROUNDED. DAILY EXPENSES OF > € 100 OR EQUIVALENT ARE NOT CONSIDERED.
BASED ON AN EXCHANGE RATE OF €1 = *CHF 1.142 **GBP 0.872 ***HUF 321.4 - °WITHOUT FREQUENT NON-RESPONSES
%THE UK
&SWITZERLAND
16
€**
€*
**CHF 17,9
*GBP 10,5
'HUNGARY
6
€***
***HUF 1833
12
10
€
MEMBERS IN EUROPE
SPEND 10 EURO PER DAY
NEARBY THEIR SPACES
WHEN PRESENT - WITH
SOME EXCEPTIONS.

17. €
AVERAGE DAILY EXPENDITURE OF MEMBERS NEARBY A COWORKING SPACE
≥ 1M
< 1M - 500K
< 500K - 100K
> 100K
2,75 5,5 8,25 11
7 €
11 €
10 €
EURO-ZONE
!
EURO-ZONE - BY NUMBER OF INHABITANTS
!
"
#
9
€
GERMANY
FRANCE
10
€
ITALY
12
€
$
5 % TRIMMED MEAN - RESULTS ROUNDED. DAILY EXPENSES OF > € 100 OR EQUIVALENT ARE NOT CONSIDERED.
BASED ON AN EXCHANGE RATE OF €1 = *CHF 1.142 **GBP 0.872 ***HUF 321.4 - °WITHOUT FREQUENT NON-RESPONSES
%THE UK
&SWITZERLAND
16
€**
€*
**CHF 17,9
*GBP 10,5
'HUNGARY
6
€***
***HUF 1833
12
10
€
NOT ENOUGH DATA AVAILABLE
€
MEMBERS IN EUROPE
SPEND 10 EURO PER DAY
NEARBY THEIR SPACES
WHEN PRESENT - WITH
SOME EXCEPTIONS.
THE SMALLER THE CITY,
THE LESS OFTEN
MEMBERS USE OR PAY
FOR LOCAL SERVICES.

18. €
AVERAGE DAILY EXPENDITURE OF MEMBERS NEARBY A COWORKING SPACE
≥ 1M
< 1M - 500K
< 500K - 100K
> 100K
2,75 5,5 8,25 11
7 €
11 €
10 €
EURO-ZONE
!
EURO-ZONE - BY NUMBER OF INHABITANTS
!
"
#
9
€
GERMANY
FRANCE
10
€
ITALY
12
€
$
5 % TRIMMED MEAN - RESULTS ROUNDED. DAILY EXPENSES OF > € 100 OR EQUIVALENT ARE NOT CONSIDERED.
BASED ON AN EXCHANGE RATE OF €1 = *CHF 1.142 **GBP 0.872 ***HUF 321.4 - °WITHOUT FREQUENT NON-RESPONSES
%THE UK
&SWITZERLAND
16
€**
€*
**CHF 17,9
*GBP 10,5
'HUNGARY
6
€***
***HUF 1833
12
10
€
NOT ENOUGH DATA AVAILABLE
9%
7%
84% WITH DAILY EXPENSES
NO DAILY EXPENSES
NO RESPONSE
SHARE OF MEMBERS
WITH DAILY EXPENDITURES
NEARBY°
85%
85%
75%
€
MEMBERS IN EUROPE
SPEND 10 EURO PER DAY
NEARBY THEIR SPACES
WHEN PRESENT - WITH
SOME EXCEPTIONS.
THE SMALLER THE CITY,
THE LESS OFTEN
MEMBERS USE OR PAY
FOR LOCAL SERVICES.

19. MOST FREQUENT ACTIVITIES DONE AT COWORKING SPACES
MOST FREQUENT ACTIVITIES ONLY (“ALWAYS” OR “OFTEN”) , WITHOUT N.A. FOR ALL FIVE ACTIVITIES.
QUESTION: WHAT DO YOU USE YOUR COWORKING SPACE FOR? PLEASE RATE THE FREQUENCY OF THE FOLLOWING ACTIVITIES.
22,5
45
67,5
90
REGULAR MEETINGS NETWORKING EVENTS BASE FOR
25%25%
32%
47%
84%
19%16%
28%
39%
80%
EUROPE
GLOBAL
WORK LOCAL ERRANDS
& ACTIVITIES
EVERY FIFTH
MEMBER USES A
COWORKING
SPACE NOT FOR
REGULAR WORK -

20. MOST FREQUENT ACTIVITIES DONE AT COWORKING SPACES
MOST FREQUENT ACTIVITIES ONLY (“ALWAYS” OR “OFTEN”) , WITHOUT N.A. FOR ALL FIVE ACTIVITIES.
QUESTION: WHAT DO YOU USE YOUR COWORKING SPACE FOR? PLEASE RATE THE FREQUENCY OF THE FOLLOWING ACTIVITIES.
= SHARE IS ABOVE AVERAGE
22,5
45
67,5
90
REGULAR MEETINGS NETWORKING EVENTS BASE FOR
25%25%
32%
47%
84%
19%16%
28%
39%
80%
EUROPE
GLOBAL
WORK LOCAL ERRANDS
& ACTIVITIES
EVENTS
NETWORKINGREGULAR
WORK
≥ 1M INHABITANTS < 1M - 100 K INHABITANTS > 100K INHABITANTS
EUROPE
MEETINGS
BASE FOR LOCAL
ERRANDS & ACTIVITIES
ACTIVITIES THAT ARE ABOVE-AVERAGE - BY NUMBER OF INHABITANTS IN EUROPE:
FREQUENCY OF
ACTIVITIES ARE
IN BETWEEN
EVERY FIFTH
MEMBER USES A
COWORKING
SPACE NOT FOR
REGULAR WORK -
ESPECIALLY IN
SMALLER CITIES.

21. MEMBERSHIP DECISION MAKERS & PAYERS
RESULTS ARE ROUNDED
THE VAST MAJORITY
CHOSE TO WORK AT A
COWORKING SPACE
ON THEIR OWN.
0 25 50 75 100
79% DECIDED BY
MEMBERS
18% BY
EMPLOYERS
OR CLIENTS
WHO DECIDED TO WORK AT A COWORKING SPACE?
EUROPE

22. MEMBERSHIP DECISION MAKERS & PAYERS
RESULTS ARE ROUNDED
0 25 50 75 100
79% DECIDED BY
MEMBERS
18% BY
EMPLOYERS
OR CLIENTS
0 25 50 75 100
61% PAID BY
MEMBERS
28% PAID BY
EMPLOYERS
OR CLIENTS
OTHER: FREE MEMBERSHIPS (4%), PAID BY OTHER CAPITAL TYPES (2%) & OTHER
WHO DECIDED TO WORK AT A COWORKING SPACE?
WHO PAYS FOR A MEMBERSHIP?
EUROPE -3 PP +2 PP
THE VAST MAJORITY
CHOSE TO WORK AT A
COWORKING SPACE
ON THEIR OWN -
EVEN IF EMPLOYERS
PAY FOR IT.

23. REASONS FOR CHOOSING THE CURRENT COWORKING SPACE
A SOCIAL & ENJOYABLE ATMOSPHERE: 65%
INTERACTION WITH OTHERS: 60%
COMMUNITY: 60%
LIKE-MINDED PEOPLE: 55%
A CLOSE DISTANCE TO MY HOME: 58%
GOOD TRANSPORT CONNECTIONS NEARBY: 44%
OFFICE INFRASTRUCTURE
2 BASIC OFFICE INFRASTRUCTURE: 57%
A BIG OPEN WORKSPACE: 54%
A CLEAN WORKSPACE: 50%
GOOD INTERNET CONNECTIONS: 46%
TREND
REPORTED BY MEMBERS
WHO DECIDED THEMSELVES TO WORK
AT THEIR CURRENT COWORKING SPACES(AS WELL)
GLOBAL RESULTS - RESULTS ARE ROUNDED
PROXIMITY
2
TREND
SOCIAL INTERACTIONS
1
TRENDSOCIAL CRITERIA
REMAIN THE MOST
POPULAR FACTORS
WHEN CHOOSING A
COWORKING SPACE.

24. 98%63%
REASONS FOR CHOOSING THE CURRENT COWORKING SPACE
REPORTED BY MEMBERS WHO DECIDED THEMSELVES TO WORK AT THEIR CURRENT COWORKING SPACES - GLOBAL RESULTS - RESULTS ARE ROUNDED
FREELANCERS EMPLOYEES EMPLOYERS
A COMMUNITY
CLOSE TO HOME
INTERACTIONS WITH OTHERS &
A SOCIAL ATMOSPHERE
BASIC OFFICE
INFRASTRUCTURE
71%
68%
54%
LIKE MINDED PEOPLE
SPECIAL MINOR REASONS:
FRIENDS WHO WORK THERE
87%
DECIDED THEMSELVES TO WORK AT THEIR CURRENT COWORKING SPACES
FREELANCERS
LOOK FOR
COMMUNITY.

25. 98%63%
REASONS FOR CHOOSING THE CURRENT COWORKING SPACE
REPORTED BY MEMBERS WHO DECIDED THEMSELVES TO WORK AT THEIR CURRENT COWORKING SPACES - GLOBAL RESULTS - RESULTS ARE ROUNDED
FREELANCERS EMPLOYEES EMPLOYERS
A COMMUNITY
CLOSE TO HOME
A SOCIAL
ATMOSPHERE
INTERACTIONS WITH OTHERS &
A SOCIAL ATMOSPHERE
BASIC OFFICE
INFRASTRUCTURE
71%
68%
54%
79%
CLOSE TO HOME 65%
GOOD TRANSPORT
CONNECTIONS 61%
68%
OFFICE
INFRASTRUCTURES60-65%
GOOD VALUE
FOR MONEY 64%
COMPANY PAYS FOR ITLIKE MINDED PEOPLE
SPECIAL MINOR REASONS:
LIKE MINDED PEOPLE
FRIENDS WHO WORK THERE FLEXIBLE WORK TIMES
A SOCIAL
ATMOSPHERE
COMMUNITY: 55% COMMUNITY: 59%
87%
DECIDED THEMSELVES TO WORK AT THEIR CURRENT COWORKING SPACES
FREELANCERS
LOOK FOR
COMMUNITY.
EMPLOYERS &
EMPLOYEES VALUE
THE SOCIAL
ATMOSPHERE
RATHER THAN
BECOMING PART OF
A COMMUNITY.

26. 39%62% 55%
COMMUNITY & COWORKING SPACE RATING
FREELANCERS EMPLOYEES EMPLOYERS
FEEL STRONGLY THAT THEY ARE PART OF
THE COMMUNITY AT THEIR COWORKING SPACE
EUROPE
EMPLOYEES FEEL
LESS STRONGLY
CONNECTED TO
A COWORKING
COMMUNITY.

27. 55%
EMPLOYERS
62% 39%
COMMUNITY & COWORKING SPACE RATING
FREELANCERS EMPLOYEES
FEEL STRONGLY THAT THEY ARE PART OF
THE COMMUNITY AT THEIR COWORKING SPACE
EUROPE
EMPLOYEES FEEL
LESS STRONGLY
CONNECTED TO
A COWORKING
COMMUNITY.

28. 55%
EMPLOYERS
39%62%
COMMUNITY & COWORKING SPACE RATING
FREELANCERS EMPLOYEES
FEEL STRONGLY THAT THEY ARE PART OF
THE COMMUNITY AT THEIR COWORKING SPACE
8,1 7,8 7,6
IS THE RATING OF THEIR CURRENT
COWORKING SPACE
EUROPE 2017: 8,0 - 2016: 8,7 2017: 7,8 - 2016: 7,9 2017: 7,2 - 2016: 8,6
EMPLOYEES FEEL
LESS STRONGLY
CONNECTED TO
A COWORKING
COMMUNITY.
BUT GIVE THEIR A
COWORKING SPACE
A SURPRISINGLY
HIGH RATING.

29. COWORKING SPACE RATINGS IN EUROPE
TAKE THE NEW SURVEY: COWORKINGSURVEY.COM
OCEANIA
GLOBAL
ASIA
EUROPE
2,5 5 7,5 10
7,8
7,9
8,1
8,2
8,3
8,3
AVERAGE RATING PER
CONTINENT IN 2018*
NORTH
AMERICA
SOUTH
AMERICA
*MEAN
OUT OF 10
EUROPE'S
COWORKING SPACES
HAVE RECEIVED
A LOWER
RATING FROM
MEMBERS...

30. COWORKING SPACE RATINGS IN EUROPE
TAKE THE NEW SURVEY: COWORKINGSURVEY.COM
OCEANIA
GLOBAL
ASIA
EUROPE
2,5 5 7,5 10
7,8
7,9
8,1
8,2
8,3
8,3
AVERAGE RATING PER
CONTINENT IN 2018*
NORTH
AMERICA
SOUTH
AMERICA
*MEAN
EUROPE
GLOBAL
5 5,9 6,8 7,7 8,6
8,3
8,3
8,3
8,4
8,1
7,9
8,3
8,1
7,8
2018 2017 2016
& OVER THE PAST
THREE YEARS
OUT OF 10
OUT OF 10
NORTH
AMERICA
EUROPE'S
COWORKING SPACES
HAVE RECEIVED
A LOWER
RATING FROM
MEMBERS...
FOR THE PAST TWO
YEARS.

31. 8,7
≥ 1M INHABITANTS
< 1M - 100K INHABITANTS
< 100K INHABITANTS
7,5
7,8
2017: 7,5 - 2016: 8,3
2017: 8,1 - 2016: 8,1
2017: 8,2 - 2016: 8,8
7,9
≥ 500K
< 500K
8,3
PLEASE NOTE: THE MAXIMUM CAPACITY OF PEOPLE WHO CAN WORK FROM A
COWORKING SPACE IS REPORTED BY MEMBERS! THEY ONLY CAN REPORT WHAT
THEY SEE, AND THAT'S LIKELY RESTRICTED TO AREAS WITH OPEN ACCESS.
BY NO. OF INHABITANTS
COWORKING SPACE RATINGS IN EUROPE WITHIN THE PAST THREE YEARS
MEAN
BETWEEN 1 AND 10 STARS
EUROPE
RATINGS
SIGNIFICANTLY
DROPPED IN
SMALLER SPACES
AND SMALLER CITIES,
BUT VERY BIG
SPACES ARE ALSO
AFFECTED
BY LOWER RATINGS.

32. 8,7
≥ 1M INHABITANTS
< 1M - 100K INHABITANTS
< 100K INHABITANTS
7,5
7,8
2017: 7,5 - 2016: 8,3
2017: 8,1 - 2016: 8,1
2017: 8,2 - 2016: 8,8
7,9
≥ 500K
< 500K
8,3
< 25 MEMBERS
25 - 49 MEMBERS
≥ 50 MEMBERS
PLEASE NOTE: THE MAXIMUM CAPACITY OF PEOPLE WHO CAN WORK FROM A
COWORKING SPACE IS REPORTED BY MEMBERS! THEY ONLY CAN REPORT WHAT
THEY SEE, AND THAT'S LIKELY RESTRICTED TO AREAS WITH OPEN ACCESS.
8,0
8,3
7,2
2017: 7,8 - 2016: 8,4
2017: 8,2 - 2016: 8,6
2017: 7,5 - 2016: 8,1
BY NO. OF INHABITANTS BY MAXIMUM CAPACITY
COWORKING SPACE RATINGS IN EUROPE WITHIN THE PAST THREE YEARS
MEAN
BETWEEN 1 AND 10 STARS
EUROPE
RATINGS
SIGNIFICANTLY
DROPPED IN
SMALLER SPACES
AND SMALLER CITIES,
BUT VERY BIG
SPACES ARE ALSO
AFFECTED
BY LOWER RATINGS.

33. MAIN REASONS FOR CONSIDERING TO LEAVE A COWORKING SPACE
GLOBAL RESULTS - REPORTED BY MEMBERS THAT CONSIDER TO LEAVE A COWORKING SPACE IN LESS THAN THREE MONTHS
LACK OF INTERACTION WITH OTHER MEMBERS
INTERESTED IN WORKING AT ANOTHER SPACE
LIVE IN THIS AREA JUST FOR A SHORT WHILE
NOT ABLE TO FOCUS ON WORK
IT IS TOO EXPENSIVE
JUST WANNA CHANGE MY WORKING ENVIRONMENT
COMMUTING TIME IS TOO LONG
0 4,5 9 13,5 18
9%
10%
10%
10%
12%
14%
18%LACK OF
INTERACTION
IS THE #1 REASON
FOR LEAVING A
COWORKING SPACE
FOLLOWED BY
INTEREST IN OTHER
COWORKING SPACES
AND JOB NOMADS.
SELECTION OF OTHER REASONS: JOB PROJECT AT A COWORKING SPACE ENDED, PREGNANCY

34. MAIN TAKE AWAYS
1
2
3
MEMBER NUMBERS & SIZE OF COWORKING SPACES ARE
STILL ON THE RISE - ESPECIALLY IN BIG CITIES
COWORKING SPACES SUPPORT THE LOCAL ECONOMY
ABOUT 10 EURO PER MEMBER PER WORKING DAY
COMMUNITY IS NOT EVERYTHING -
BUT A SOCIAL ATMOSPHERE AND INTERACTION IS!

35. THANKS FOR LISTENING.
CARSTEN@DESKMAG.COM

37. C
O
W
O
R
K
I
N
G
RENTAL STATUS & AVERAGE LEASE TERMS
FULL
0% 2 125% 4 250% 6 375%
5% TRIMMED MEAN
MEAN: 64 MONTHS
MEDIAN:60 MONTHS
78%
OF US COWORKING SPACES
LEASE OR RENT
THEIR LOCATION
61 MONTHS
EUROPE
GLOBALLY: 70%
LEASE TERM
EUROPEAN SPACES
PREFER TO RENT A
LOCATION.

38. C
O
W
O
R
K
I
N
G
RENTAL STATUS & AVERAGE LEASE TERMS
*5% TRIMMED MEAN
I SIGN
EVERYTHING
FULL
0% 2 125% 4 250% 6 375%
5% TRIMMED MEAN
MEAN: 64 MONTHS
MEDIAN:60 MONTHS
≥ 1M INHABITANTS
< 1M - 500K INHABITANTS
< 500K - 100K INHABITANTS
< 100K INHABITANTS
0% 2 000% 4 000% 6 000% 8 000%
BY NO. OF INHABITANTS LOCAL TO A COWORKING SPACE*
78%
OF US COWORKING SPACES
LEASE OR RENT
THEIR LOCATION
61 MONTHS
74 MONTHS
73 MONTHS
60 MONTHS
41 MONTHSEUROPE
GLOBALLY: 70%
LEASE TERM
EUROPEAN SPACES
PREFER TO RENT A
LOCATION.

39. C
O
W
O
R
K
I
N
G
RENTAL STATUS & AVERAGE LEASE TERMS
*5% TRIMMED MEAN
I SIGN
EVERYTHING
FULL
0% 2 125% 4 250% 6 375%
5% TRIMMED MEAN
MEAN: 64 MONTHS
MEDIAN:60 MONTHS
≥ 1M INHABITANTS
< 1M - 500K INHABITANTS
< 500K - 100K INHABITANTS
< 100K INHABITANTS
0% 2 000% 4 000% 6 000% 8 000%
BY NO. OF INHABITANTS LOCAL TO A COWORKING SPACE*
78%
OF US COWORKING SPACES
LEASE OR RENT
THEIR LOCATION
61 MONTHS
74 MONTHS
73 MONTHS
60 MONTHS
41 MONTHSEUROPE
6%
ARE PART OF A MANAGEMENT
CONTRACT OR JOINT-VENTURE
WITH THE LOCATION OWNER
12%
OWN THEIR
LOCATION
GLOBALLY: 70%
GLOBALLY: 11%
GLOBALLY: 16%
LEASE TERM
REMAINING PERCENTAGES: OTHER & N.A.
EUROPEAN SPACES
PREFER TO RENT A
LOCATION.
MANAGING CONTRACTS
& JOINT-VENTURES
WITH
LOCATION OWNERS
HAVE BECOME MORE
POPULAR - JUST NOT IN
EUROPE YET.

40. 98%63%
REASONS FOR CHOOSING THE CURRENT COWORKING SPACE
REPORTED BY MEMBERS WHO DECIDED THEMSELVES TO WORK AT THEIR CURRENT COWORKING SPACES - GLOBAL RESULTS - RESULTS ARE ROUNDED
FREELANCERS EMPLOYEES EMPLOYERS
87%
DECIDED THEMSELVES TO WORK AT THEIR CURRENT COWORKING SPACES

41. BASIC CHARACTERISTICS OF COWORKING SPACES
EUROPE
21%
25%
6%
GLOBAL
SHARE OF
PRIVATE OFFICES*
HAVE A MANAGEMENT
CONTRACT OR
JOINT-VENTURE WITH
THEIR LANDLORD
+7 PP
+6 PP
REVENUE SHARE
UP TO 22%
REVENUE SHARE
UP TO 27%*ARITHMETIC MEAN
SHARE OF ENTITIES
WITH ONLY ONE
COWORKING SPACE
68%
AVERAGES OF NUMBER OF SPACES IN OPERATION:
5% TRIMMED: MEAN 1,8 -MEAN 3,3
CHAIN AVERAGES:
5% TRIMMED: MEAN 5,7 -MEAN 8,3
AVERAGES OF NUMBER OF SPACES IN OPERATION:
5% TRIMMED: MEAN 1,6 -MEAN 3,7
71%
-3 PP
0
11%
70% 16%
78% 12%
RENT A LOCATION OWN A LOCATION
RENT A LOCATION OWN A LOCATION

42. BUDAPEST
EDINBURGH
COWORKING SPACE RATINGS
EUROPEAN
COUNTRIES WITH ABOVE-
AVERAGE RATINGS:
EUROPEAN
CITIES WITH BEST-RATED
COWORKING SPACES
*MEAN
LISBON
PLEASE NOTE: THE NUMBER OF RESPONDENTS
PER CITY IS STILL TOO
LOW TO TAKE THIS RESULT TOO SERIOUSLY.
FRANCE
HUNGARY
PORTUGAL
SWITZERLAND
'
&
"
(
IN ALPHABETIC ORDER IN ALPHABETIC ORDER
ZURICH

43. MEMBER PLANS TO REMAIN AT THEIR CURRENT COWORKING SPACES
EUROPE GLOBAL
3%6%
14%
21%
55%
NOT PLANNING TO LEAVE
AT LEAST FOR ONE MORE YEAR
AT LEAST FOR THREE MONTHS
AT LEAST FOR ONE MONTH
PLANNING TO LEAVE IN LESS THAN A MONTH
N.A.
3%4%
15%
18% 60%