It's rather confusing.
I quite like the fact that qualification via the Grand prix of tournaments requires a good performance over a long period, so the victor is almost certain to be the most deserving. If you look at the last several SGM tournies there have been a number of different victors and it's a bit of a lottery who wins the world championship tournament. (heck - Leko might have won 
) I mean with these SGM tournies, if you get a few wins early you can often draw your way to victory.
The mega - tournament gives the lower ranked players a shot at it which I think is good.
I think the old candidates matches cycle system, with the current WC having an automatic spot in the final was best though. Dunno why they got rid of it.
Here is a news article about the recent changes FIDE made to the World Championship cycle:
http://gambit.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/06/28/world-chess-federation-changes-championship-rules-again/
The new FIDE World Championship cycle will be that the winner of a grand prix series of tournaments held over a two-year period would play a match against the winner of a mega-tournament called the World Cup. The winner of that match would then play a match against the world champion. The grand prix would begin in 2008.
What are your thoughts about FIDE changing the World Championship cycle once again? Also, what do you think of the new world championship cycle, can it work?