We consider a variation of the classic Hotelling-Downs model with the addition of facility synergies. Unlike in the classic model, where clients always use the facility closest to them, we study clients who prefer locations with many facilities to those with few facilities while simultaneously attempting to minimize their distance as well. We show that, in contrast with the classic model, Nash equilibria for our setting always exist, and, in fact, there always exists a Nash equilibrium such that the sum of client costs equals the cost of the optimum solution. Our main result is a bound of \(\frac{225}{64}\approx 3.516\) on the Price of Anarchy for our model, showing that, although the client behavior is more complex in our model (and often more realistic depending on the application), the cost of Nash equilibrium solutions still cannot be much worse than the cost of the optimum facility placement.