McLaren chief executive Zak Brown has once again voiced his long‑standing opposition to the practice of multi‑team ownership and close technical alliances within Formula 1, a stance that has resurfaced as Mercedes evaluates a potential minority investment in Alpine. Brown has been an outspoken critic of what he labels "A‑B teams" – situations where one organisation, either through direct ownership or a deep technical partnership, enjoys a privileged relationship with another team, potentially skewing competition.
The issue is not new to the sport. Red Bull has owned two separate entries since 2005, while Ferrari maintains a historic technical partnership with Haas.
More recently, reports emerged that Mercedes is among several parties interested in acquiring the 24 percent stake in Alpine currently held by Otro Capital, a U.S. investment firm. Alpine’s majority shareholder is the Renault Group, and the team’s executive advisor, Flavio Briatore, has remarked that in a typical corporate structure the 75 percent owner makes the decisions while the remaining 25 percent is essentially a passenger, describing the situation as a "reality" of the current ownership model.
Although such arrangements are permitted under the sport’s regulations, Brown – whose McLaren cars are powered by Mercedes engines – insists that his criticism applies universally, regardless of which parties are involved. "I frown upon it," he said, emphasizing that cross‑team links should be limited to the supply of power units and nothing beyond that.
Speaking to Sky Sports News, Brown reiterated a sentiment he has held for a decade: "I don’t like co‑ownership, I don’t like A‑B teams. It carries a high risk of compromising the sporting integrity of Formula 1." He cited concrete examples to illustrate his concerns. At the 2024 Singapore Grand Prix, for instance, Daniel Ricciardo, driving for the Racing Bulls (Red Bull’s junior team), took a point away from McLaren, indirectly aiding Max Verstappen and Red Bull’s championship bid. Brown also highlighted the transfer of intellectual property and personnel between teams, noting that staff can move overnight, granting the receiving team a competitive edge without the need to spend under the cost cap, effectively creating a hidden financial advantage.
Brown drew an analogy to football to make his point clearer. "Imagine a Premier League season where two clubs are owned by the same group.
One club could survive relegation while the other is protected financially – that’s the kind of imbalance we risk in Formula 1," he explained at a McLaren media event. "Engine supply should be the furthest a relationship can go.
All eleven teams need to operate as independently as possible." He added that he raised these concerns during the latest round of Concorde Agreement negotiations, which bring together the sport’s governing bodies and team representatives. "I think it’s being managed now, but we’ve seen incidents in the past and we need to eliminate them, not expand them," Brown said.
While Brown expressed admiration for Red Bull’s two‑decade investment in the sport and acknowledged the historical context of their acquisition of the struggling Minardi team in 2005, he cautioned against repeating that model. "I’m glad to see the Racing Bulls and Red Bull don’t look like the same car any more," he noted, suggesting that the two entities have diverged in design and operation. He also mentioned ongoing dialogue with Laurent Mekies, Red Bull’s team principal, who, according to Brown, has been open about the challenges of owning two teams.
"He’s the only one with two teams and he’s been very transparent – ‘if you see something you don’t like, let’s talk about it.’" This, Brown believes, shows that the parties involved recognize the potential pitfalls and are willing to keep the situation in check. The Concorde Agreement discussions have even touched on the possibility that, over time, one of the co‑owned teams might need to be divested to preserve competitive balance. Brown stressed his appreciation for the contributions Red Bull has made to Formula 1, but warned that expanding the multi‑team ownership model would be detrimental to the sport’s future.
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, even though Mercedes already supplies power units to Alpine from this season. Wolff said the group is simply evaluating the merits of a minority shareholding and has not reached a decision. "We are looking at it from different angles and haven’t come to any conclusions yet. We want to know whether it makes sense," he explained.
In addition to Mercedes, a consortium that includes former Red Bull team principal Christian Horner has also shown interest in purchasing the Alpine shares, indicating that the market for minority stakes in F1 teams is becoming increasingly active. The broader context of Brown’s comments comes as Formula 1 prepares for its next race weekend, with the Miami Grand Prix scheduled for May 1‑3, featuring the season’s second sprint race. Fans can follow the action live on Sky Sports F1 or stream via NOW, with the flexibility to cancel at any time.
In summary, Zak Brown’s renewed critique underscores a growing unease about the concentration of influence within Formula 1. While multi‑team ownership is currently allowed, the McLaren boss argues that the sport’s long‑term health depends on preserving clear boundaries between teams, limiting relationships to engine supply, and ensuring that each of the eleven entries competes on a level playing field. The ongoing discussions in the Concorde Agreement and the interest from major manufacturers and consortiums suggest that the issue will remain at the forefront of F1 governance for the foreseeable future.