Zak Brown, the chief executive of McLaren, has once again voiced his longstanding concerns about the growing trend of multi‑ownership and close technical ties between Formula 1 teams, a debate that has been reignited by recent reports that Mercedes is weighing a minority investment in Alpine. Brown has been an outspoken opponent of what he terms "A‑B teams" – situations where one outfit enjoys a deeper, often hidden, relationship with another through shared ownership, technical collaboration, or strategic alliances. The issue is not new to the sport.
Since 2005 Red Bull has owned two separate entries, while Ferrari maintains a long‑standing technical partnership with Haas. The latest development involves Mercedes, which, according to media reports, is considering buying a 24 percent share of Alpine currently held by the U.S. investment vehicle Otro Capital. Alpine’s majority shareholder remains the Renault Group, and the team’s executive advisor, Flavio Briatore, has remarked that in a typical corporate structure the majority owner (75 percent) makes the decisions while the minority partner (25 percent) is essentially a passenger.
Although such ownership structures are legal under current FIA regulations, Brown, whose McLaren cars run on Mercedes power units, insists that his objections apply universally, regardless of which parties are involved. He told Sky Sports News that he has been warning against co‑ownership for a decade, arguing that it threatens the sport’s competitive integrity. "I think it runs a high risk of compromising the sporting integrity of the sport," he said, adding that any relationship beyond the simple supply of engines should be avoided. Brown illustrated his point with recent on‑track examples.
He cited the 2024 Singapore Grand Prix, where Daniel Ricciardo, driving for the Racing Bulls (Red Bull’s junior team), took a point away from McLaren that ultimately benefited Max Verstappen and Red Bull. He also highlighted the transfer of intellectual property and staff between teams, noting that personnel can move overnight, giving the receiving team a cost‑cap advantage because they acquire expertise without having to pay the full market price. "They’re not going to have to write a cheque, so it’s a cost‑cap advantage," Brown explained.
To make the issue relatable, Brown compared it to a hypothetical scenario in football: imagine two Premier League clubs owned by the same conglomerate. If one club is relegated, the other can survive financially, creating an uneven playing field.
"That’s the risk we run," he warned. "Engine supply should be as far as it goes.
All eleven teams need to be as independent as possible." During the latest round of Concorde Agreement negotiations, Brown said he raised these concerns directly with the sport’s stakeholders. He believes the current discussions are moving in the right direction but stresses that past incidents show the need for stricter rules to prevent any increase in cross‑team influence.
While he acknowledges Red Bull’s pioneering role in expanding the sport’s commercial model – noting their acquisition of the struggling Minardi team in 2005 to create a second entry – he cautions against replicating that model without safeguards. Brown also praised Red Bull for keeping the Racing Bulls and the main Red Bull Racing operation distinct, stating that the two cars now look and perform differently. He mentioned his conversations with Laurent Mekies, Red Bull’s team principal, who has been transparent about the challenges of managing two teams under one umbrella. "He’s the only one who has two teams and he’s been very open and transparent," Brown said, suggesting that Red Bull recognizes the potential pitfalls and is willing to discuss them.
The Concorde Agreement itself has considered whether one of the dual‑owned teams should eventually be divested to preserve competition. Brown expressed optimism that, with proper oversight, the sport can continue to benefit from investment while avoiding the creation of quasi‑feeder teams that enjoy an unfair advantage. Mercedes team principal Toto Wolff, when asked about the Alpine stake, clarified that Mercedes does not intend to turn Alpine into a junior team to its works outfit. Instead, Wolff said the company is simply evaluating the financial and strategic merits of a minority share, without having reached a decision.
"We are looking at it from different angles, and we haven't come to any conclusions," he told reporters. A separate consortium that includes former Red Bull team principal Christian Horner has also shown interest in the Alpine shareholding. The broader debate touches on the future of Formula 1’s business model. As the sport expands globally and attracts new investors, the temptation to create multi‑team conglomerates grows.
Yet, as Brown argues, the essence of F1 is competition on merit, not the financial clout of parent companies. Maintaining clear boundaries between ownership and technical collaboration is essential to ensure that every team, from the well‑funded factory outfits to the smaller privateers, competes on a level playing field.
Looking ahead, the F1 calendar will resume on May 1‑3 with the Miami Grand Prix, featuring the season’s second sprint weekend. Fans can follow the action live on Sky Sports F1 or stream via NOW, with flexible subscription options.
As the sport navigates these governance challenges, the voices of team principals like Zak Brown serve as a reminder that preserving the integrity of competition must remain a top priority.