It would be a fantastic exercise if you could make it work, and I would be happy to entrust one or two experimental K64 (particularly 120 and if nothing else were available).
I think my point was, however, that, would people entrust their special films to you as a semi-commercial exercise? (Not sure if that is your intent). e.g. I shot a lot of K64 at my daughter's wedding three years ago but had that film not been available, I would have used only the freshest and nearest E6 substitute and the most reliable processing.
I can only think that any long-term future for Kodachrome outside Kodak support can be no more than small-scale enthusiast/experimental, but I really would love to be proved wrong.
I think your right, if Kodak wanted to end Kodachrome, and someone offered to buy the process, formulae, machinery, and set up their own processing system, which could simply be sub-contracting to Dwaynes, as done currently, they could keep Kodachrome going.
The real issue is that Kodachrome is unique, and unique makes it expensive, expensive is fine when you make massively huge batches, and most importantly, sell those batches before the film expires, making something on each roll. Of course the more units you can sell, the less you need to make on each unit in order to make a decent profit on the product.
Yes you can make smaller batches, but some of the costs are fixed, and some are volume discounted, so the smaller batch does not result in a linear reduction in cost, at some point the costs simply get too high to continue. Not only is the film production designed for high volume, but in the case of K14, so is the processing.
Film has a point where you will pick one film you like, over a film that's cheaper. For example if you can buy E6 film and get it processed for $15/roll, and K14 film costs you $20/roll (processed), maybe you choose the K14, would you still choose the K14 film if it was $40/roll or $80/roll, what about $160/roll?