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 taken on fresh relevance after reports that Mercedes is considering purchasing a minority share in Alpine. Brown has been an outspoken detractor of what he labels “A‑B teams” – situations where one outfit enjoys a deeper connection to another, either through shared ownership or a technical alliance. The phenomenon is not new to the sport: Red Bull has owned two separate entries since 2005, while Ferrari has maintained a historic technical partnership with Haas. The latest twist comes from news that Mercedes is among a group of potential investors eyeing the 24 percent stake in Alpine currently held by the U.S.
investment firm Otro Capital. 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 majority holder (75 percent) makes the decisions while the minority partner (25 percent) is essentially a passenger. This description, he suggests, mirrors the reality of many F1 ownership arrangements.
Although such structures are permitted under the sport’s regulations, Brown – whose McLaren cars run on Mercedes power units – insists that his concerns apply universally, regardless of which parties are involved. "I frown upon it," he said, adding that cross‑team relationships should be limited to the supply of customer engines and nothing more.
Speaking to Sky Sports News, Brown explained his position: "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 that illustrate the potential for unfair advantage. At the 2024 Singapore Grand Prix, a fastest lap set by Daniel Ricciardo while driving for Racing Bulls – a Red Bull‑owned team – effectively took a point away from McLaren, benefiting Max Verstappen and Red Bull.
Brown also highlighted the ease with which intellectual property can be transferred between affiliated teams, and how staff can move overnight, circumventing the usual 2028 restriction on personnel changes. "That gives a cost‑cap advantage without having to write a cheque," he argued.
Brown likened the situation to a hypothetical Premier League scenario in which two clubs are owned by the same consortium. "One club would be relegated if it loses, while the other can afford to lose," he said. "That’s the risk we run in F1." He continued, "I think having engine power units as suppliers is as far as it should go.
All eleven teams should be as independent as possible." During the most recent round of Concorde Agreement negotiations, Brown raised these concerns, noting that while the issue is being managed, past incidents demonstrate the need to eliminate, rather than expand, such arrangements. He expressed admiration for Red Bull’s two‑decade investment in the sport, acknowledging the historical context of Red Bull’s takeover of the struggling Minardi team in 2005 to create a second entry. However, he cautioned against repeating that model, stating, "I’m glad to see, quite frankly, that the Racing Bulls and the Red Bull don’t look like the same race car." Brown also referenced conversations with Laurent Mekies, Red Bull’s team principal, who, despite overseeing two teams, has been transparent about the challenges and open to dialogue. "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 chat about it.’" Brown believes this openness shows that Red Bull recognises the potential pitfalls and does not wish to push the envelope further.
In the Concorde Agreement talks, there were discussions about whether one of the co‑owned teams should eventually be divested. While Brown respects the contributions Red Bull has made to the sport, he warns that expanding the multi‑team model would be a mistake.
"As long as it’s managed and watched, it’s acceptable, but adding to it would be detrimental to the sport," he concluded. Mercedes team principal Toto Wolff, when asked about the Alpine investment, 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 stake, stating, "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 separate consortium that includes former Red Bull team principal Christian Horner has also been identified as an interested party in the Alpine shares, indicating that the market for minority stakes in F1 teams is heating up.
The broader context of these ownership debates is set against the backdrop of the upcoming Miami Grand Prix, the second Sprint weekend of the season, which will be broadcast live on Sky Sports F1. Fans can stream the race via NOW without a contract, canceling at any time. The ongoing discussion about team independence, ownership structures, and competitive fairness remains a pivotal issue as Formula 1 continues to evolve in the 2020s, with the sport’s governance bodies tasked with balancing commercial interests against the need to preserve a level playing field for all competitors.