Zak Brown, the chief executive of McLaren, has once again voiced his long‑standing opposition to the practice of multi‑ownership and closely linked partnerships between Formula 1 teams. His comments come at a time when Mercedes has signaled interest in acquiring a minority share of the Alpine squad. Brown has been a vocal critic of what he labels "A‑B teams" – situations where one outfit enjoys a deeper connection to another, either through shared ownership structures or technical collaborations.
He argues that such arrangements can erode the competitive balance that the sport relies upon. The issue is not new.
Red Bull has owned two separate teams since 2005, while Ferrari maintains a historic technical partnership with Haas. More recently, reports emerged that Mercedes is among several parties considering the purchase of the 24 percent stake in Alpine currently held by Otro Capital, a U.S.
investment firm. Alpine’s majority owner is the Renault Group, and the team’s executive adviser, Flavio Briatore, has remarked that in a typical corporate set‑up the majority shareholder (75 percent) makes the decisions while the minority holder (25 percent) is essentially a passenger. Although the sport’s regulations permit these kinds of relationships, Brown – whose McLaren cars run on Mercedes power units – insists that his stance applies universally: "Regardless of who is involved, I frown upon it." He believes that the only acceptable link between teams should be the supply of customer engines, and nothing beyond that.
Speaking to Sky Sports News, Brown said, "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 concerns.
At the 2024 Singapore Grand Prix, a fastest lap set by Daniel Ricciardo while driving for Racing Bulls (the Red Bull‑owned junior team) effectively took a point away from McLaren and helped Max Verstappen’s Red Bull. Brown also pointed to the transfer of intellectual property between teams and the rapid movement of staff from one operation to another, sometimes before the 2028 cooling‑off period expires. "When staff move overnight, they bring knowledge that can give a sporting advantage without the need for a direct cash payment, which translates into a cost‑cap benefit," he explained.
During a McLaren media event, Brown used a football analogy: "Imagine a Premier League season where two clubs are owned by the same group. One club could be relegated while the other can afford to lose. That’s the risk we face in F1." He reiterated that the relationship should stop at engine supply and that each of the eleven teams should operate as independently as possible. Brown told reporters that he raised these concerns during the most recent Concorde Agreement negotiations among F1’s stakeholders.
He believes the issue is being addressed but warns that past incidents show the need for stricter rules: "We’ve seen incidents in the past and we need to do away with it, not increase it." While he expressed "huge appreciation" for Red Bull’s two‑decade investment in the sport – noting that the Austrian giant took over the struggling Minardi team in 2005 to create a second outfit – Brown cautioned against replicating that model. "I’m glad to see, quite frankly, that the Racing Bulls and the Red Bull don’t look like the same race car," he said, indicating that the two teams now appear distinct.
Brown also mentioned his conversations with Laurent Mekies, Red Bull’s team principal, acknowledging that Mekies has been open about the challenges of owning two teams. "He’s the only one who has two teams and he’s been very transparent: ‘If you see something you don’t like, let’s talk about it.’ So I think they recognise the issue and don’t want to push the envelope," Brown added. He recalled discussions within the Concorde Agreement about whether one of the co‑owned teams should eventually be divested.
"There were talks about over time one of the teams being sold off, but we also have a huge appreciation for what Red Bull has done for the sport," Brown said. "As long as it’s managed and watched, adding more of it would be a mistake for the sport." Mercedes team principal Toto Wolff, when asked about the Alpine stake, clarified that the German manufacturer does not intend to turn Alpine into a junior team to its works outfit. Instead, Wolff said Mercedes is simply evaluating the merits of a minority investment and has not reached a conclusion: "We are looking at it from different angles, and we haven’t come to any conclusions.
We want to know whether it makes sense." A consortium that includes former Red Bull team principal Christian Horner has also been confirmed as an interested party in the Alpine shares, underscoring the broader market interest in F1 team ownership. The debate over multi‑team ownership is likely to intensify as the sport approaches the 2026 regulatory overhaul, which will introduce new power‑unit specifications and cost‑cap measures. Stakeholders will need to balance the financial realities of competing at the highest level with the imperative to preserve a level playing field.
In summary, Zak Brown’s renewed criticism highlights a fundamental tension in modern Formula 1: the desire for financial stability and technical collaboration versus the need to protect the sport’s competitive integrity. As Mercedes, Red Bull, and other entities explore deeper involvement across multiple teams, the governing bodies, teams, and fans will be watching closely to ensure that the sport remains fair, exciting, and truly a contest of engineering and driver skill.