I guess I'd question how many brands are needed in the mainline full-service business hotel range.

Park, Andaz, W, StR: I totally get all of those. Each has its own identifiable characteristics and vibe that make it unique from the others. All are excellent brands, and there is no brand confusion between them. They're clearly above the generic Sheraton, Marriott, or Hilton of the world and the each chase a slightly different guest.

Same goes for Hyatt's other concepts like Hyatt Place, Hyatt House, etc. (I know practically nothing about Centric.) Those make sense and there isn't really a direct Starwood equivalent. In fact, those brands are something I'd absolutely LOVE about a combined program. HP in particular...

But I don't get why the combined portfolio would need Sheraton, Westin, plus two (three?) levels of Hyatt all clumped in chasing my day-to-day business stay at basically the same price point and same level of service. What, if anything, could I expect to be different at the Hyatts 2 years from now? Why is this valuable from a marketing perspective? It seems like two brands would suffice - maybe two plus the designation of "grand" to mean convention hotel, if that's really what that's supposed to mean.