In other words: there is no real rundown process, the nomination IS the vote, and it basically goes into the final tally.
This is complete crap, because it means any film without huge recognition has almost no chance to build any momentum.. because the voting is way long over. More then that, the system that favors this tally method will largely benefit films which manage to please the majority, but not necessarily develop ardent advocates.
So yes, it will benefit films that are widely liked over films that are passionately loved by a small few. We'll probably see more winners like Gladiator and less winners like Slumdog Millionaire. While I think anything the muddies the intent of the voters is a bad thing, I'm not sure the final results will be worse: the formula of small films that achieve wider popular appeal winning Oscars has left the awards ceremony bordering on irrelevancy -- thus the drop in ratings.
At some point the Academy has to make a decision: is Best Picture a mechanism for the filmmaking community to acknowledge the film it collectively admires most, or is a declaration of the movie that will be remembered as most excellent down the road? If the Academy Awards remain a celebration of the filmmaking community, all of these changes are a corruption of the essential point of the gathering. If they are to be focused outward toward the culture at large, this new scheme will probably provide a better Oracle for the movie of a given year.
My guess is: the nominations get more diverse and more interesting, while the winners get less diverse and less interesting.