The question of whether F1 teams should be allowed to own or control a second outfit has returned to the spotlight, with McLaren Racing CEO Zak Brown leading the criticism.
At the centre of the debate is Red Bull’s long-standing structure, which sees it operate both Red Bull Racing and Racing Bulls. While the two teams are formally separate, their shared ownership has raised persistent concerns about competitive fairness.
Brown has been particularly outspoken, arguing: “I think A/B teams, we need to get away from as much as possible, as quickly as possible.”
He added that such arrangements “run a real high risk of compromising the integrity of sporting fairness,” pointing to examples where cooperation — whether intentional or not — could influence outcomes.
One frequently cited flashpoint came in 2024, when a fastest lap from Racing Bulls driver Daniel Ricciardo impacted McLaren’s Lando Norris in its fight with Red Bull’s Max Verstappen.
For Brown, this illustrates a broader issue: “We’ve seen it play out on track in a sporting way.”
Beyond race-day scenarios, he also highlighted operational advantages. The ability to move staff freely between sister teams, without the delays or financial implications faced by independent outfits, creates what he views as “an unfair financial advantage” and “an unfair sporting advantage.”
The debate is no longer limited to Red Bull. Speculation over Mercedes taking a stake in Alpine has intensified scrutiny, and Brown is uniform in his opinion, despite McLaren being a Mercedes power unit customer, which is where he feels the line should be drawn.
Ultimately, Brown’s stance is clear: “All 11 teams should be absolutely as independent as possible.”
But in a championship built on technical partnerships and commercial alliances, achieving that independence is far from straightforward.
So, where do you think the line should be drawn? Let us know what you think in the comments section and by voting below in the latest poll by RacingNews365.