McLaren’s chief executive Zak Brown has once again voiced his long‑standing opposition to the practice of multi‑ownership and close‑knit partnerships between Formula 1 teams, a stance that has gained fresh relevance following reports that Mercedes is contemplating the purchase of a minority share in Alpine. Brown has been an outspoken critic of what he describes as “A‑B teams” – situations where one outfit enjoys a privileged relationship with another, either through shared ownership structures or technical collaborations that go beyond the usual customer‑supplier model. He argues that such arrangements can erode the competitive balance of the sport and undermine its integrity.
The issue is not hypothetical. Since 2005 Red Bull has owned two separate entries, while Ferrari maintains a long‑standing technical partnership with Haas. More recently, it emerged that Mercedes is among several parties interested in acquiring the 24 percent stake in Alpine that is currently held by Otro Capital, a U.S. investment firm.
Alpine’s majority shareholder is the Renault Group, and Flavio Briatore, who serves as an executive advisor to the Enstone‑based team, has remarked that in a typical corporate structure the majority holder (75 percent) makes the decisions while the minority partner (25 percent) is essentially a passenger. Although the sport’s regulations allow such shareholdings, Brown – whose own McLaren cars run on Mercedes power units – says his concerns apply universally. "Regardless of who is involved, I frown upon it," he told Sky Sports News, adding that cross‑team relationships should be limited to the supply of customer power units and nothing more.
He reiterated his position, saying, "I’ve been saying for ten years I don’t like co‑ownership, I don’t like A‑B teams. I think it runs a high risk of compromising the sporting integrity of the sport." He cited concrete examples to illustrate his point. At the 2024 Singapore Grand Prix, a fastest lap set by Daniel Ricciardo while driving for Racing Bulls effectively took a point away from McLaren, which in turn helped Max Verstappen and Red Bull.
He also highlighted the transfer of intellectual property between teams and the rapid movement of staff from one operation to another, sometimes occurring overnight. "When staff move and I have to wait until 2028 for a cooling‑off period, they gain a sporting advantage without having to write a cheque – it’s a cost‑cap advantage," Brown explained. During a media day for McLaren, Brown used a football analogy to make his case more vivid: "Can you imagine a Premier League match where two clubs are owned by the same group?
One club could afford to lose while the other faces relegation. That’s the risk we run in F1." He argued that the only acceptable relationship should be that of a power‑unit supplier, and that each of the eleven teams should strive to be as independent as possible.
Brown said he raised these concerns during the latest round of Concorde Agreement negotiations, noting that while the issue is being managed, past incidents show that more decisive action is needed. "We’ve seen incidents in the past and we need to do away with it, not increase it," he said. He also expressed admiration for Red Bull’s two‑team model, acknowledging the historic context of Red Bull’s acquisition of the struggling Minardi team in 2005, which later became Scuderia AlphaTauri. However, he cautioned against replicating that model indiscriminately.
"I’m glad to see, quite frankly, that the Racing Bulls and Red Bull don’t look like the same race car," he remarked, emphasizing that the two entities appear distinct on the track. Brown mentioned that he has spoken with Laurent Mekies, Red Bull’s team principal, about the matter. "I’m not picking on him in particular, but he’s the only one who has two teams and he’s been very open and transparent: ‘If you see something you don’t like, let’s just talk about it.’ So I think they recognise the issue and don’t want to push the envelope," Brown said.
The Concorde Agreement discussions have even touched on the possibility that, over time, one of the dual‑ownership teams might need to be divested. Brown stressed that while he respects what Red Bull has contributed to the sport over the past two decades, any expansion of the multi‑team model would be a mistake. "As long as it’s managed and watched… adding to it would be a mistake for the sport," he concluded.
Mercedes team principal Toto Wolff, when asked about the Alpine stake, clarified that the German outfit is not looking to turn Alpine into a junior team to its works outfit. Instead, Wolff said Mercedes is simply evaluating whether a minority investment makes commercial sense. "We are looking at it from different angles, and we haven’t come to any conclusions yet. We want to know whether it makes sense," he told reporters.
A separate consortium that includes former Red Bull team principal Christian Horner has also been reported as an interested party in the Alpine shareholding, adding further complexity to the ownership landscape. The broader debate over team independence, ownership structures, and technical partnerships is likely to intensify as Formula 1 heads into its 2026 season, which will see new power‑unit regulations and a reshaped financial model.
Fans and stakeholders will be watching closely to see whether the sport’s governing bodies impose stricter limits on multi‑team ownership or whether the current laissez‑faire approach will continue. Meanwhile, the championship returns on May 1‑3 with the Miami Grand Prix, featuring the second Sprint weekend of the year, and will be broadcast live on Sky Sports F1.
Viewers can stream the action via NOW without a contract and cancel at any time.