I have learned a few things since my original post. So, I will respond to myself, since I was operating with a misconception.
I thought that the EOS network could seamlessly switch between block producing companies if blocks are missed by an active BP. EOS will seamlessly replace a BP with a standby BP if the vote warrants it. But will not automatically swap in a standby BP just because active BP misses a few blocks. This won’t happen until the active BP is offline for 24 hours. Thus, if a BPs primary location goes down, they can switch to another active server faster and more efficiently that promoting a standby.
Additionally, p2p communication and thus network performance is more efficient with less nodes.
These two points have lead me to now believe it is best to have 50-75 block producers (companies), each with 2-3 layers of redundancy within their networks. And then maybe 25-50 emergency block producers (companies) that run 1-2 servers in low cost operation. This set-up minimizes the number of missed blocks when active block producing loses a site.
RE: Block Producers - Multiple Location Design