McLaren's chief executive Zak Brown has once again taken aim at the growing trend of multi‑team ownership and close technical alliances within Formula 1, a stance that has gained fresh relevance after reports that Mercedes is exploring the purchase of a minority share in Alpine. Brown, who has long warned against the creation of "A‑B teams" – where one outfit enjoys a privileged relationship with another through shared ownership or deep technical collaboration – used his recent media appearances to reiterate why he believes such arrangements threaten the sport's competitive integrity.
Brown's concerns are rooted in the history of F1's evolving business models. Since 2005 Red Bull has owned both Red Bull Racing and the junior outfit formerly known as Minardi, now Scuderia AlphaTauri.
Ferrari, meanwhile, maintains a long‑standing technical partnership with Haas, supplying power units and sharing data. The latest development involves Mercedes, a dominant engine supplier, being linked to a potential purchase of the 24 percent stake in Alpine currently held by the US‑based investment firm Otro Capital. Alpine is majority‑owned by the Renault Group, with former Formula 1 magnate Flavio Briatore describing the current share structure as a classic case of a "passenger" minority holding that merely follows the decisions of the majority owner.
Although the FIA's regulations do not expressly forbid such cross‑ownership, Brown, whose McLaren cars run on Mercedes power units, argued that the principle should apply universally, regardless of which parties are involved. "I frown upon it," he said, emphasizing that any relationship beyond a straightforward customer‑supplier agreement risks distorting the level playing field that the sport strives to maintain.
In an interview with Sky Sports News, Brown traced his objections back a decade, noting that co‑ownership and close alliances have repeatedly produced sporting controversies. He cited the 2024 Singapore Grand Prix as a recent illustration: Daniel Ricciardo, driving for the Red Bull‑backed Racing Bulls team, secured a point that indirectly benefited Max Verstappen and Red Bull, prompting questions about whether the two teams were truly independent. Brown also highlighted the rapid transfer of intellectual property and personnel between teams, pointing out that staff can move overnight, sidestepping the 2028 restriction on such moves and effectively creating a cost‑cap advantage without any cash outlay.
Brown drew an analogy to football to make his point clear: "Imagine a Premier League season where two clubs are owned by the same consortium. One club could survive relegation because the other can afford to lose.
That's the risk we face in F1 if ownership becomes too intertwined." He argued that the only acceptable relationship should be the supply of power units, after which each team must operate as independently as possible. "All eleven teams should be as autonomous as they can be," he asserted.
During the latest round of Concorde Agreement negotiations, Brown said he raised these concerns with the sport's governing bodies, noting that while steps are being taken to manage the issue, past incidents demonstrate that more decisive action is needed. He expressed admiration for Red Bull's two‑decade investment in the sport, acknowledging that the original acquisition of Minardi was a bold move that helped the brand grow. However, he warned that replicating that model today could set a dangerous precedent.
"I'm glad to see the Racing Bulls and Red Bull cars look distinct," he added, underscoring the importance of visual and technical separation. Brown also mentioned his conversations with Laurent Mekies, Red Bull's team principal, who he said has been transparent about the challenges of owning two teams. "He's the only one with two teams and he's open about discussing any concerns," Brown noted, suggesting that Red Bull recognizes the delicate balance and is not eager to push the envelope further. The discussion also touched on the possibility of forced divestiture.
Brown recalled that the Concorde Agreement had debated whether one of the co‑owned teams should eventually be sold off to preserve competition. While he praised Red Bull's contributions to F1's growth, he cautioned that expanding the multi‑team ownership model would be a mistake for 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 for its works outfit.
Instead, Wolff said Mercedes is simply assessing the strategic merits of a minority investment, weighing potential benefits against the risk of perceived conflicts of interest. "We are looking at it from different angles and haven't reached any conclusions yet," he said.
Adding another layer to the ownership puzzle, a consortium that includes former Red Bull team principal Christian Horner has also shown interest in the Alpine shares. This development underscores how attractive minority stakes have become for parties seeking a foothold in the sport without committing to a full works operation.
As the F1 calendar heads into the Miami Grand Prix, the second sprint weekend of the season, the debate over multi‑team ownership is likely to remain front‑and‑center. Fans and stakeholders will be watching closely to see whether regulatory bodies will tighten the rules or allow the status quo to continue. Brown's outspoken stance serves as a reminder that, while financial investment is essential for the sport's growth, preserving the integrity of competition must remain the paramount concern.