I have to agree with Custard. Before I retired, the company I worked for 'rebranded'. Our directors signed up for some glitzy logo that cost a fortune to have included on headed paper because of the colour palette & shading.
The 'consultant' produced this rigid set of rules for A4 page layout which (as de-facto fixer of anything with a screen) I had to incorporate into our DTP kit.
Imagine my surprise when I found out that their A4 layout didn't actually fit onto an A4 sheet, in terms of the margins/ number of lines/ approved font.
The real 'gripper' came when I had the temerity to bring this to the attention of 'the management'. Setting aside them being somewhat irritated by the revelation, when I received an 'explanation' from the re-branding consultant as to why I had mis-interpreted their guidelines (I hadn't...they HAD cheated, and later had to admit it) their letter was.....
on A5 paper, in courier 10 pitch (ie 'mechanical typewriter' font), with a tiny 'squiggle' of a logo (I suspect some edited freebie line-art). The odd spelling mistake & bad grammar was just the icing on the cake.
Their 'logo' was central at the top.....something they had always claimed was definitely passe.....and clearly the result of bulk photocopying instead of a printed original.
Whatever posessed out directors to employ these hypocritical charlatans defies any logic, so that only leaves some uncharitable suggestions as to why they were chosen
There are any number of these 'parasite' companies out there.