Above all else, this one line majorly chaps my A.

If the hotel has a big red "Marriott" sign out front, then Marriott (corporate) had better have control over what the hotels decide to offer.

This seems like a more and more common excuse used by companies everywhere to deflect criticism: "That's a franchise - it's not our problem." Or, in some industries "Those are our subcontractors; it's not our problem."

I've had United pull the same garbage with me about problems with UX. Their response "It's Podunk Air's problem." Hmmmm...sure looks like the United brand is painted on the fuselage, not Podunk Air's. Therefore, I expect United to resolve the issue.

Likewise, hearing Marriott blame an individual property for poor service and not take responsibility for it is appalling. Whether Marriott (corporate) ordered the cuts or not, it impacts the global brand more than anything.

I still think of the mainline Marriott and Renaissance business hotels as being a quality brand. I think of them as being, in general, a half-step above the typical Hilton, Sheraton, Westin, or Doubletree. But I have to admit: the deteriorating treatment of elites and reduced services mean that I'm moving a bigger mix of my stays to HHonors. IMHO, the brands need to be able to deliver through normal business cycles both up and down. As we move towards the next up cycle, I'm probably going to be doing fewer Marriott stays than I was leading into the recent down cycle. I'll drop to MR Gold and pick up HH Diamond - we'll see how aggressively HH wants to increase my volume there.