Lots of interesting ideas and info in this thread, but in the end I don't think any of the legacy SPG or Marriott brands are going anywhere.

Compared to the concerns on FT I’m sure this merger looks very different from the perspective of the hotel franchisees that own the vast majority of the properties between MR and SPG. I think most hotel owners will NOT want to rebrand, add features, add benefits, or otherwise do anything that would add costs simply because of the merger. On the flip side, the owners that have invested in a feature (e.g. lounges) or distinctive brand likely want to keep those. Their frequent guests have come to appreciate and expect those features and benefits, and the owners likely see it as competitive differentiation.

There’s a lot of discussion about how the combined program’s 30 current brands would be “too many” and some will need to be cut or merged into others. However, MR has been very successful running 19 separate brands so I really don’t see why they can’t be successful running 30 separate brands. Some would argue that the ability to cut overhead is one of the principle drivers of value in the merger. Having one management team running 30 brands versus one running 19 and one running 11 supports that view.