I can't help but be pessimistic about the whole thing to be honest.

On paper, sounds great, will be a huge political win. In reality, I cannot see the growth they are expecting, not without incurred additional cost (I.e extra resources to run more services and/or cheaper fare initiatives) that will outweigh the benefit.

London and Manchester both need government funding to work and they have the critical population mass to achieve a self sustaining network. Yet, they haven't. As more come online, that financial pressure will only increase.

Once a good chunk of England goes franchised, most major areas are planning for it, pressure on public funds will dramatically increase. Where is that coming from? Increases in general taxation or a local mayor tax?  For a country who already has a huge debt, namely the welfare bill, this isn't a sustainable long term plan, not without extra funding coming in to pay for it.

Operators will bid with a guaranteed margin, plus they will cost in assumptions for fines to an extent. Essentially, they will have a window of failing funded by their franchise payment. Most operators now speak very fondly towards the inevitable as they know a stable expected income is a preferable position. The risk doesn't sit with them anymore, great stuff.

Maybe, once public authorities control the buses and can see the poor state of congestion and lack of priority across the region, which is a key negative diverter to any modal shift, we might see a bigger push on things like that, forcing modal shift in some cases to pay the whole thing pay. Preventing cars from entering city centres or penalising the private car to offset the cost.

I just cannot see this working long term, without significant government funding across all regions which has to come from somewhere. At best, it's a vanity project that will secure votes for a few years until people see nothing has really changed except the colour of the bus.