WSJ article seemed to have been much-influenced by the IHG PR machine. The FACT of the matter is that OVER HALF of the hotels which left the Hl system did so because they CHOSE to do so. Not every operator found it necessary to effect the "changes" IHG mandated (lobby scent, "new" music, decals on the windows, lamps on the front desk, cheap plastic signs in the bathrooms, down-scale soaps). Like the frequent stay programs across all the industry, there is a huge disconnect between the franchisor, which owns the name, and the actual, real-life owners of the hotels. IHG required the wasting of incredible amounts of money that could/shoud/would have been spent on much more guest-impactful areas. WSJ (and IHG press releases, but I repeat myself) seek to spin a financial debacle and quality calamity into something noble. It was not, and is not.