JBord

Fair enough, but that's only 1/3 of the article. The other 2/3 are completely worthless, and dare I say, stupid.

I wouldn't mind the SPG benefits with the Marriott qualification rules. It was way too easy to get status in SPG. Maybe that's what made Marriott customers appreciate what they had .
But experience from the airline mergers has taught me that the new programs usually end up at the lowest common denominator for each line-item benefit. I'd guess MR ends up comparable to Hilton, as that's the real competitor left (and secondarily Hyatt, but I don't think of Hyatt as a very business-friendly hotel).

sdsearch

To me, for Marriott to end up comparable to Hilton, it would have give free breakfast to Gold and Platinum at all brands, not just some arbitrary tiny subset of brands.

Hyatt has too small a footprint to be much of a competitor to the Mariowood giant. The only other competitor besides Hilton would be IHG, but IHG has terrible elite benefits (no breakfast or lounge access for anyone at any status level as a stated elite benefit, though certain hotels do offer one or the other in practice).

JBord

Completely agree. I think Hilton compares because most business travelers I know rely on Marriott or Hilton. When my father was working, he was an IHG guy, but I think that had more to do with company policy than personal choice. I haven't met any other business travelers who pick IHG or Hyatt (except for regular single destination travel). It's worth noting that both Marriott and Hilton also have a lot of discount/benefit contracts with large corporations. I've worked with both of these companies in the past, and also know that my company had a deal with Hilton where any of our employees, regardless of status, got free breakfast when staying at a Hilton.

So the benefits may or may not compare, but I do believe for most US business travelers, the choice is Marriott or Hilton.