New IHG hotel roster make no sence to me - how about you? Any logic you can see?
 

What is the issue that you have with it?

You know in old days it was more or less easy they there placed according to their “rankings”

IC, then CP, then Hi, Hiex and then long stay hotels – so it was more or less logical.

Once they added Hualuxe and the Indigo – they did try to put them inside according to the similar logic.

But now there is no sense to me – if you read from left to right

It will be: Kimpton Regent Indigo CP.. – Meaningless order.

Same if you go from up to down Kimpton+IC and Regent+Voco – seems ok – but Indigo + Staybridge and CP + Candlewood – make no sense again.

Look at these examples from Marriot and Hilton - although they are different - their logic is understandable for me. ​​​​​​​
https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.fly...9282de08a6.jpg
https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.fly...755945093a.jpg

I am guessing, what IHG trying to do here, is to put their brands not in any order but totally random, except to put the very well known HI and HIX on the most right hand side, to general public that IHG does not rank their brands like its competitors.

If you enforce the market position view of each brand, you are actually dilute the brand value. So IHG put its recent acquire Kimpton and Regent as the first to broadcast the new brands to public. So the less known public would know the hotels under Kimpton and Regent is now IHG.

Also the same logic about VOCO, it is a new brand and upscale, so it is very next to InterContinental, Indigo and CP.

Followed by 2 long stay brands and then 2 more new brands. My guess is that Avid and Even is not performing very well and IHG sees no added value any more as both serve a very small segment of the market.

So to conclude, the layout does not make sense if you rank brands in a particular order. But IHG's message is not about market positioning, rather, it is about to let public know the brand as brand names, not brand positions. Second, IHG wants to enforce the newer brand perception so people will see Kimpton and Regent first. It is a process of familiarisation. And there is a reason why it is put in 2 rows rather than 1 or 3. IHG wants you to focus on the unusual spot you pick up: normally the very first few brand and the unheard names hidden in between.

Very interesting and I think agreeable analysis.

I bet teams of people were hired/consulted to come up with the design and layout of that graphic...with considerations taken into human psychological/behavioral research as well as goal/objective of IHG. Such important market piece/graphic would have had many many dollars and hours put into it...and definitely nothing random/illogical with how it was came up with.

I known CP "should" be ahead of Staybridge, but I would actually expect a better stay at the latter. I like chongcao's take. Create a "ranking" and there are bottom tiers. Don't do that to your brands.

I think the old concept of one to five star or low to luxury ranking has been outdated for a long time.
A brand or hotel caters for very individual customers needs and journeys.
I take a CP or IC over a Ritz anytime, they better meet my demands.

Good move at IHG to go this way.