Originally Posted by
sdsearch
Of course, Starwood (will have been) the hotel program with the second-worst "footprint" of the majors, and Hyatt is (and will remain) the worst "footprint" of the majors.
And that poorer "footprint" is one of the major reasons why Hyatt (and SPG up until the near future) can afford to have a program that way bigger hotel families don't feel they can. They need something to attract people to make up for that poorer "footprint".
It's true that Marriott and Hilton have much larger "footprints" because they have many more properties overall.
However, that can be a false narrative for anyone looking mostly in major cities (where even Starwood's 2500+ properties or coming properties can compete)...or in the major holiday destinations around the world (where Starwood is as well situated as the bigger chains)...or, in particular, in the luxury segment (where Starwood's St Regis, Lixury Collection, and W properties total 255+ and exceed in absolute number whatever Marriott and Hilton offer and far exceed Marriott or Hilton for properties considered aspirational by those who regularly stay at luxury hotels.
Consider that over 3/4 of Marriott's portfolio has been less than upscale...while almost 90% of Starwood's portfolio is upscale or better. Hilton has an even greater proportion of less than upscale properties, and IHG is even greater. If you're looking for cheaper hotels, those chains serve you well...but not for nicer hotels. Marriott will remedy that with the addition of Starwood, of course...but that won't really make a difference until 2018 when the programs merge.