I know, isn't it ironic? When you hear the owner or manager dissed Marriott prior to the merger and complaining how these "large corporate chains puts in zero in, no cash and takes a pay cut off revenue", then why not stay boutique and focus on niche hospitality to grow a client base? It's clear the hotel wants to spend $0 on marketing and also wants a share of the big pie.

Personally, based on the reviews I've read, these 2 boutique properties will work fine as Autograph Collections, Design Hotels or Tribute Porfolio with Marriott. They lack the edge of offering the full services of a hotel to be a Luxury Collection.

I agree with you on the the acquisition of Six Senses, that brands I always believed is more aligned to Hyatt's goal - more in line with wellness or sustainability where brands like Alila works towards to. But the real world never worked base on theory but money, looks over to Marriott buying Starwood - Does Marriott really need 30 brands with competing logos in the same market? No.

As for the Six Senses, Regent and Kimpton - these are all great brands before acquisition, but IHG has the cash and scale to blow them up as larger portfolios. It may diminish the brand image as luxury icons due to the reduced exclusivity but it will also capture a larger wider market and more demographic. It definitely benefits the IHG image more than the other way round. At the end of the day, it would have been nice to see Six Senses go to an more elevated chain like Hyatt, but money triumph, companies merge and consolidate, that's just life.