Zak Brown, the chief executive of McLaren, has once again voiced his long‑standing concerns about the growing trend of multi‑team ownership and close technical alliances within Formula One. His remarks come at a time when Mercedes is reportedly evaluating a potential minority investment in the Alpine Formula One team, a move that has reignited the debate over whether such relationships threaten the sport's competitive balance.
Brown has been an outspoken opponent of what he terms "A‑B teams" – a situation where one racing outfit enjoys a privileged link to another, either through direct ownership stakes or through deep technical partnerships. He points to several high‑profile examples: Red Bull has owned two teams since 2005, Ferrari maintains a longstanding technical partnership with Haas, and Mercedes is now rumored to be interested in purchasing the 24 percent share of Alpine currently held by the U.S. investment firm Otro Capital.
The majority of Alpine is owned by the Renault Group, and Flavio Briatore, the team's executive adviser, has described the current share structure as a typical arrangement where a dominant 75‑percent holder makes the decisions while the minority partner is essentially a passenger. While such arrangements are legal under the sport's regulations, Brown, whose McLaren cars run on Mercedes power units, argues that the principle applies universally.
"I frown upon any form of cross‑team ownership or partnership that goes beyond the simple supply of engines," he said, emphasizing that the integrity of the competition could be compromised if one entity exerts undue influence over multiple entries. In an interview with Sky Sports News, Brown explained his position in detail: "For the past decade I've been warning against co‑ownership and the creation of A‑B teams.
The risk is that it erodes the sporting integrity of Formula 1. We've already seen scenarios where a driver from one team, such as Daniel Ricciardo when he was with Racing Bulls, took a point away from McLaren to benefit Max Verstappen and Red Bull at the 2024 Singapore Grand Prix.
We've also witnessed intellectual property being transferred between teams, and staff moving overnight, which under the current regulations can give a competitive edge without a corresponding cost‑cap hit." Brown used a football analogy to illustrate his point: "Imagine a Premier League where two clubs are owned by the same group. If one club gets relegated, the other can simply absorb the loss. That's the danger we face in F1 if ownership becomes too intertwined." He continued, "The only acceptable relationship should be that of a power‑unit supplier. Beyond that, every team should operate as independently as possible." He added that his concerns have been raised during the latest round of Concorde Agreement negotiations, where all F1 stakeholders discuss the sport's governance.
"We need to eliminate these conflicts of interest, not expand them," Brown asserted. He also expressed admiration for Red Bull's achievements over the past two decades, noting that the company originally took over the struggling Minardi team in 2005 to create a second outfit. However, he cautioned that the Red Bull model should not become a template for future ownership structures.
"I'm pleased that Racing Bulls and Red Bull now look like distinct entities on the grid," he said, referencing the rebranding of Red Bull's junior team. Brown mentioned ongoing conversations with Laurent Mekies, Red Bull's team principal, who he described as open and transparent about the issues surrounding dual ownership. "He's the only one with two teams, and he's willing to discuss any concerns openly," Brown noted, suggesting that Red Bull recognizes the potential pitfalls and is not eager to push the envelope further. The discussion also touched on the possibility of mandatory divestiture.
"There were talks in the Concorde Agreement about whether one of the teams should eventually be sold off to preserve competition," Brown recalled. He emphasized that while he respects the historical contributions of multi‑team owners, any expansion of such models would be a mistake for the sport. 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 squad for its works team.
Instead, Wolff said Mercedes is simply assessing the financial and strategic merits of acquiring a minority stake. "We are looking at it from different angles and have not reached any conclusions yet," he said. He added that the decision will be based on whether the investment makes sense for both parties.
In addition to Mercedes, a consortium that includes former Red Bull team principal Christian Horner has also shown interest in the Alpine shareholding, indicating that the market for minority stakes in F1 teams is becoming increasingly active. Brown concluded by reiterating his belief that the sport should strive for maximum independence among its eleven entries.
"Engine supply agreements are the furthest we should go in linking teams together. Anything beyond that threatens the level playing field that fans expect and that the sport needs to survive," he said. The upcoming Miami Grand Prix, scheduled for May 1‑3, will be the first race where these ownership debates may have a tangible impact on the grid, as teams prepare for the second Sprint weekend of the season. Fans can follow the action live on Sky Sports F1 or stream via NOW without a contract, ensuring they stay up‑to‑date on the latest developments both on and off the track.