Of course, when a private company spends its own money on rebranding that is called good marketing.
No, it's not, and this constant "Animal Farm" 2 legs good, 4 legs bad, black and white distinction about public vs private does no-one any good.
There have been plenty of statements criticising private businesses on rebrands, in many industries. In the bus industry, there has been a mass of criticism directed at Arriva for their relaunch (and their appalling website). Same goes for Stagecoach's rebranding. In fact, it can be highlighted that some businesses (e.g. Transdev, Go North East) have been roundly criticised for excessive branding.
That doesn't get away from the criticisms of Transport for Greater Manchester; personal preference but I'm not sold on the Bee Network image. Liverpool City got it better with their hydrogen vehicles, internally and externally to my mind
https://www.liverpoolcityregion-ca....drogen-buses-coming-to-liverpool-city-region/. Realistically, I'd sooner that there was something like this being considered for Greater Manchester in order to make buses seem aspirational instead of it being a slightly dull yellow exterior and standard interior as if to show that they are the poor relation to Metrolink.
Still, nothing compares to the frankly amateurish route branding that TfL rolled out on selected routes; if a professional agency was engaged in this, I'd be amazed (photo credit: Gellico on flickr)