Red Bull – VCARB: Zak Brown is up against multi-ownership of teams

« I don't think they are cheating. » Zak Brown is clear, he is not speaking to put the case against Red Bull, but to point out the inconsistency of the rules which, according to him, are not suitable. “ To my knowledge, he continues, there is no other major sport where one can own two competing teams, due to political influence and the player market (Brown is not entirely right, because the practice is more and more common in football for example. Editor's note) »

While Christian Horner, his alter ego from Milton Keynes (UK), says people would do better to applaud Red Bull's massive investments instead of criticizing, the lively American prefers to point out the non-technical benefits that generate the same shareholding. Like racing strategies for example. The RBs could possibly opt for tire choices not in the direction of performance for themselves, but in the direction of the interest of the parent company, Red Bull Racing. Have a pair of votes within the Commission F1 also has political advantages, with Red Bull only needing the support of a single third party to block debates.

This was particularly the case at the Abu Dhabi F1 Commission meeting in 2023 where a reform of the cost capping rules was abandoned. There is also the question of staff mobility who can move much more easily from one team to another, without being subject to the traditional period of forced inactivity. “ Nothing stops them from sending their employees back and forth, laments Brown, citing the example of Nick Roberts, senior race strategy analyst at Red Bull, and Guillaume Cattelani, former chief engineer, who both moved to RB this winter. Conversely, he gets annoyed, we had to wait a year to have David Sanchez (Ex-Ferrari. Editor’s note) or Rob Marshall (ex-Red Bull. Editor’s note)! »

Legitimate concerns, but not new

The fact remains that if Brown's questions are legitimate, they are not strictly speaking something new. They even date from 2006 when Red Bull bought Minardi at the end of 2005 to make them Toro Rosso (then AlphaTauri, and RB today). Except that now, the boss of Woking (United Kingdom) believes that a healthy F1 no longer needs to help the less well-off structures. “ 15 years ago we had no budget cap and there was such a gap that we could help small teams because they needed it, breathes Brown. Now that everyone is subject to a regulated budget, the infrastructure is a little different. RB's wind tunnel was better than ours until recently, and now they have the same budget as us... There's no reason why it can't do what McLaren or Red Bull do. They have the same resources! »

Brown, who does not want to stop there, promises to put pressure on the leaders of F1, and even the anti-competitive authorities of the EU. The Californian wants, by 2026 at the latest, changes to be made to the regulations to ban fractional ownership – and even to ban customer spare parts. Who cares if it means more standard components to help smaller teams. “ That's what the fans want, that's what the sponsors want, asserts Brown. I got the agreement from all the other independent teams. They are not as vocal, but all agree even if not all are ready. Let's make sure they are there by 2026. "Case to follow.