Nigel Mansell Shares Concerns of Multi-Team Ownership

F1 is back in action this weekend in Miami but a major topic of conversation that has come up in the past couple of weeks is multi-team ownership. Talks of Alpine, a Mercedes customer team, being bought out completely by the German marque, has reignited the debate around owning more than one team on the grid - a move spearheaded by Red Bull - and its impact on competitive independence.

For 1992 World Drivers’ Champion Nigel Mansell, these developments represent a significant shift from the independent entrepreneurial spirit that once defined the grid. The F1 icon suggests that as the sport moves further into a corporate-led era, the risks associated with technical monopolies and the barriers for new independent entrants have reached a critical point, potentially altering the fundamental identity of the world's premier racing category.

Multi-team ownership and the threat of monopoly

The move toward technical partnerships and shared ownership structures marks a departure from a historical model where independent figures drove innovation. Mansell reflects on the legacy of personalities like Colin Chapman, whose influence defined the sport's trajectory during the late 20th century.

"I think this is probably the most dynamic question you can ask at this time because if we go back, obviously over the years, you have incredible entrepreneurs and individuals who owned teams. I'll never forget the late Colin Chapman who was a fantastic innovator, designer and engineer.”

Mansell further observes that the modern sport has become a closed shop, where the financial requirements to compete effectively have pushed the individual entrepreneur out of the market in favour of multi-national entities. He suggests that when these larger organisations extend their reach into second-tier teams, it creates an inherent competitive advantage.

"Now, it's crystalised in the fact that unless you've got hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of millions of pounds to spend, you can't compete. It's a bit of a closed shop. You certainly don't have the individuals, and if you do there's only a few of them. What you have now is multinational companies.”

"How do you compete with them? And then when they maybe have second-tier teams or they're involved there as well, that's got to be an advantage.”

For the former Ferrari and Williams driver, the trend toward multi-team involvement is a risky path. While he acknowledges the necessity of engine leasing, he advocates for a return to a grid where the cars remain fundamentally independent of one another to avoid a monopolistic landscape.

"I'm not quite sure about multi-team ownership. It's a dangerous route to go down. It'd be lovely to have 13 teams again, 26 cars, all independent from one another, unless you're renting the engine or doing something like that.”

"To be associated or own more than what you need to own, monopoly comes into it.”

Driver pathways and the expansion of the grid

One of the primary justifications for the existence of B-teams, such as the relationship between Red Bull and Racing Bulls, is the creation of a defined progression for young talent. While Mansell agrees that these structures provide clear opportunities, he believes that a better way to promote that is by utilising the full capacity of the grid.

"Yes it certainly does offer a clear pathway for drivers. I think another thing to consider about drivers progressing, don't forget, they're licensed to have 26 cars on the grid. They're still four cars short. So they're still two teams short.”

The resistance to expanding the field often comes down to the financial implications for existing teams, who remain protective of the commercial pot. Mansell argues that the governing body should focus on overcoming these financial hurdles to allow for a full field of 26 cars, thereby naturally increasing opportunities for new drivers.

"We know the reason for that. Even for the new teams to come on board they had to donate an awful lot of money into the pot to share because the teams don't want to share the pot or dilute the pot.”

"It's two separate incidents. To have more drivers to come in and have more opportunity, let's have a full grid of 26 cars, however you have to cut and slice it.”

"You should put those questions to the powers that be for one reason - more new drivers on the grid having opportunities in Formula One.”

The escalating financial barriers of modern power units

The lack of diversity among current power unit providers is frequently cited as a result of the "outrageous" costs associated with modern hybrid technology. Mansell contrasts the current seven-figure price tag of a single engine with the era of the Cosworth DFV, where competitive machinery was accessible to a much wider range of teams.

“The cost of a current power unit, I think it's certainly over seven figures isn't it, just for one engine.”

"You don't have to look back too many years and certainly in our day, you got a great Cosworth DFV for $25,000 (£18,470). So, I mean that's in our lifetime and not that many years ago.”

The former World Drivers’ Champion recalls the "vibrant" atmosphere of the mid-80s, where dozens of cars would compete for a limited number of grid slots - a stark contrast to the current restricted entry list.

"Back in the early 80s, it was only £2-3 million a year to pay everybody. Drivers, a team of 87-120 people. It was so vibrant back then because in the mid-80s, there were 46 cars trying to qualify for 26 places on the grid. It was outstanding. It was unbelievable how many Formula One teams there were.”

To rectify the current financial imbalance, Mansell suggests that the sport needs to prioritise regulatory consistency and simplicity. By reducing the complexity of the engines and limiting constant rule changes, the initial development fortunes spent by manufacturers could be significantly curtailed.

"The cost element is outrageous, some of it. That's one for the powers that be isn't it. They regulate all that and it's not inexpensive to do what they're doing.”

"It would be lovely if they had a proper engine where everybody could do whatever they wanted to do to the engine but they can't do any more. The costs would come straight down. And if you have consistency, the costs come down even more. But if you keep changing things, to push the limits, the amount of money the manufacturers have to spend to get the engines to be as dynamic as they can, it's a fortune in the first few years.”

F1 Returns After Hiatus

Mansell and fans across the globe are very excited to welcome the F1 back after five weeks without any racing action. It has given the teams a chance to make urgent changes while the favourites Mercedes refine their competitive edge. Before practice has even started, Kimi Antonelli and George Russell are clear favourites in Miami, however, we expect the gap to close this weekend. If you're backing one of the chasing pack to cause an upset, you can quickly work out your potential returns using a bet calculator.

Read Mansell's thoughts on the new F1 Regulations