Zak Brown warns F1 over new A/B team alliances

McLaren Racing CEO Zak Brown has warned Formula 1 it would be making a mistake if it allowed any new A/B team structure or co-ownership model, arguing that closer alliances risk damaging sporting fairness and fan trust.

Speaking on Wednesday, Brown said F1 needs to move away from A/B teams "as quickly as possible" and insisted the issue goes beyond any one manufacturer. His comments come amid reports that Mercedes is considering buying the 24% Alpine stake held by Otro Capital, with discussions also taking place over a closer working relationship between the two teams.

Brown said his position applies to "anybody and everybody" and is not aimed personally at one team or individual. But he pointed to Red Bull's long-running ownership of Racing Bulls as the clearest example of the model he believes the sport should leave behind. He said the subject was heavily debated in the last Concorde Agreement, including discussions over whether one of Red Bull's two teams should eventually be divested.

While Brown said he can accept Red Bull's historic arrangement if it is carefully monitored, he drew a firm line at any expansion of that model. "I think as long as it's managed and watched [the Red Bull situation is OK]," he said. "But certainly adding to it, I think would be a mistake for the sport."

His central argument was that these structures create "a real high risk of compromising the integrity of sporting fairness" at a time when fans expect a fully independent grid. Brown said what would "turn fans off" is if they no longer feel there are "11 independent racing teams."

To explain why, he pointed to several cases he believes show how close links between teams can affect competition. Brown cited Daniel Ricciardo taking the fastest-lap point away from McLaren in Singapore in 2024 "to help the other team," a reference to Red Bull's two-team structure. He also raised the 2020 Racing Point brake-duct intellectual property case and argued that staff can move "overnight" between affiliated outfits in ways that create both "an unfair financial advantage" and "an unfair sporting advantage" under the cost cap.

Brown widened the criticism beyond shared ownership to very close technical and operational partnerships. He singled out Ferrari and Haas, saying people can move back and forth while intellectual property is not limited to paperwork. "With IP there's a lot in your head with that," he said.

For Brown, that is why engine supply should be the limit of cooperation between F1 teams. He said "having power unit suppliers is as far as it should go" and argued that "all 11 teams should be absolutely as independent as possible."

He framed the risk in football terms, asking whether anyone could accept "a Premier League game where you've got two teams owned by the same group" with one side needing the result and the other able to lose. For Brown, that is the scenario F1 edges toward if it allows new A/B-style alliances, and the one most likely to erode confidence in the championship's competitive integrity.