At least publicly, Starwood’s response to the initial unsolicited buyout offer from a group of Chinese investors was non-committal. While acknowledging that the bid featured a higher share price than Marriott’s offer, the company continued supporting a merger with Marriott, presumably viewing a Marriott-Starwood combination as a better long-term driver of value.

But today, Starwood disclosed that the group, led by Anbang Insurance, had submitted a revised offer that “the Starwood Board of Directors, in consultation with its legal and financial advisors, has determined constitutes a ‘Superior Proposal,’ as defined in Starwood’s merger agreement with Marriott International, Inc.”

Notwithstanding the “Superior Proposal” characterization, Starwood’s official position once again is one of support for a tie-up with Marriott. “Starwood’s Board has not changed its recommendation in support of Starwood’s merger with Marriott.”

Still, Anbang’s latest offer is sufficiently superior to Marriott’s that Starwood’s board may be hard pressed to convince the hotel’s shareholders to forego more money up front in order to roll the dice on the purported but unproven benefits of creating the world’s largest hotel chain by merging with Marriott.

Of course, Marriott’s current offer may not be its final offer. Starwood has given Marriott until March 28 to revise its offer, so the matter is far from resolved.

For the time being, Marriott loyalists, who see the Starwood acquisition as a welcome expansion of their earning and redemption opportunities, and Starwood loyalists, who fear a Marriott takeover would be a downgrade, will have to hold their breath and keep their fingers crossed. The only certainty: There will be winners and there will be losers.

Reader Reality Check

Which option do favor for Starwood: a merger with Marriott, or retaining its independence under new ownership?

After 20 years working in the travel industry, and almost that long writing about it, Tim Winship knows a thing or two about travel. Follow him on Twitter @twinship.