Last Updated on January 3 2025, 1:17 pm

The Concorde Agreement which is up for renewal at the end of 2025 is the glue which binds the world of Formula One together contractually. It is a contract between the FIA, the F1 teams and the FOM Group which controls the commercial interest of the sport and it defines the terms by which the annual F1 competition must take place.

Before the first agreement in 1981, teams cold pick and choose which events they attended and drivers had threatened frequent boycotts of certain Grand Prix weekends on the grounds of poor safety controls being in place.

The intent of the various agreements over the years is to promote professionalism and certainty, all part of what was required to take F1 from racing in farmers fields in days of yore, to the cathedrals of speed we now see erected around the world.

 

 

 

Concorde Agreement – the F1 glue

The certainty the various Concorde Agreements have brought about  has allowed big time investment through TV broadcasting rights and long term partners of the sport, which year on year has seen the teams negotiate an ever increasing percentage of  the wealth created each year.

The latest and eighth Concorde agreement was in 2021, but not all the terms and conditions were properly thought out. The teams inserted an anti-dilution clause into the contract which would see the current ten F1 teams compensated with a share of $200m for each incremental competitor who joins the grid.

Yet in just over twelve months since the ink was dry on the 2021 arrangement, F1 team principals were talking about how this fee had been understated, with the likes of gentler Steiner claiming Andretti, if accepted into the sport, should be paying in the region of $600m anti-dilution fee.

One of the anomalies in the world of Formula One, is the ability for a single owner to enter two racing teams for the annual competition, something Red Bull has done since the acquisition of the Minardi team for the 2006 campaign. Red Bull immediately rebranded the Faenza based outfit to Toro Rosso, which remained the team’s name until it became AlphaTuari in 2020.

Ferrari plan for Hamilton’s first week

 

 

 

RB move to Milton Keynes

Another name change for last year saw the team ridiculously called the Visa Cash App Racing Bulls, something which CEO Peter Bayer sought to change for the coming year of competition. While the entrant is listed by the FIA as having the same name, the constructor is now registered as The Racing Bulls Honda RBPT.

Over the years Formula One has evolved from an almost affordable racing series where wealthy privateers could by a customer car and race when they pleased, to the monolithic beast it has become today. Teams are now often over a 1000 strong in terms of their workforce and the funds required to go racing stretch well into the n in figures.

Red Bull invested in their Faenza based team at a time when F1 was in some turmoil. The subsequent global financial crisis saw the likes off Toyota and Honda withdraw from the sport with just a few months notice. The fact two teams were owned by the same billionaire individual was at the time of little interest to the rest of the F1 competitors, and the focus of the sport was to desperately retain a grid of at least ten teams.

McLaren CEO Żak Brown believes the time has come to revisit the matter, arguing that an owner of two F1 teams has an unfair amount of political power within the sport. This coincides with a huge shakeup of the Red Bull sister team, which has moved a significant number of its operations over the past year, to the Red Bull campus in Milton Keynes.

Briatore confirms rumour

 

 

 

Brown calls for FIA rules change

The relationship between the two F1 racing outfits has ebbed and flowed over the years. Toro Rosso enjoyed a period when they developed their entire car without input from Red Bull but now in an attempt to maximise resources, the Racing Bulls will buy a number of components for their cars directly from the Red Bull Racing team.

This kind of arrangement exists elsewhere on the grid, with Haas buying all allowable components under the regulations from Ferrari and Dallara. The American owned F1 team is often characterised as a kit car entry, given its dependence on others to create their car to go racing.

The CEO of RB has described the move from Italy as a “game changer” given recruitment of specialist individuals now becomes more of a matter of course from other competitors in the English motorsport valley. Yet Zak Brown believes the days of a single owner of multiple F1 teams has had its day and should be addressed in the Concorde Agreement.

Brown accepts that Red Bull and their sister team are playing by the rules and not in anyway being underhand. “Simply, I think they’re very much playing by the rules, I have an issue with the rules,” Brown told Sky Sports in 2024. “I believe the FIA needs to address this. As Helmut [Marko, Red Bull motorsport advisor] has stated, he’s going to maximise the opportunity, which is what you would do if you owned two teams and the rules are what they are today.

Ferrari: Hamilton in for BIG shock

 

 

 

Racing Bulls CEO is unconcerned

“But I think we’re going to find, if the intent of the cap and in all sports is to have an equal playing field in the way the rules are currently written, aren’t the same for everyone.

“You have pockets of teams, also the whole A/B team situation – that doesn’t have that level playing field. So I think we now need to address it, and the FIA needs to address it for the rules.”

Yet Peter Bayer, the CEO of RB is not concerned as in his experience working at the FIA, he understands the depth of relationships elsewhere on the F1 grid. As to the voices calling for change, “Honestly, they don’t irritate me because, having spent enough time at the FIA, I know how other teams collaborate,” he said speaking to PlanetF1.

“I said the other day, I think I can say it again – I know for certain that Ferrari and Haas work closer than Red Bull Racing and us. I understand that it’s a cutthroat competition.

“Everybody’s trying to throw stones into the path of the other one. But, if you just look, take a step back and listen to our drivers and the engineers – listen to the feedback. You will hear that our car, it’s a different car. It’s simply not a copy. Otherwise, we wouldn’t be where we are in the first place.”

Hulkenberg at Ferrari

 

 

 

Red Bull ensured a credible F1 grid

Bayer jokes about Ollie Bearman describing the difference between the Haas and Ferrari cars he drove in 2024 as just the colour. Bayer also notes the rules for 2026 have not changed concerning the listed parts available for purchase by smaller teams, because the quickest car will not be so due to the sharing of gearbox technology.

The list parts regulations allow the smaller teams to concentrate their resources on other aspects of the car and notes with the arrival of Cadillac, only they, RBR and Williams are not partnered with an OEM.

Williams at present makes its own suspension, although the renewal plan being enacted at Grove may see James Vowles decided to end this practice.

The first opportunity for the Concorde Agreement to ban the ownership of more than one F1 team is realistically come 2030, given the bulk of the 2026 arrangement is now agreed. It may be by then the memories of teams going bust mid-season, or pulling out of the sport at short notice will have faded.

But for now those in charge in F1 know that Red Bull Racing ensured a credible F1 grid for the best part of two decades, when the whimsical decisions of Toyota and Honda and the poor management of the three new teams in 2010 threatened to cut the number of entrants into single digits.

Hamilton sends message as Ferrari driver

 

 

 

How Christian Horner managed Newey out of Red Bull

Adrian Newey ends his eighteen year relationship with Red Bull Racing come March this year and will complete a move to Lawrence Stroll’s Aston Martin team as the managing technical partner for the organisation. The F1 car design guru proved to be a restless individual in his early career, bouncing between Indycar and F1 design work.

Despite joining the Leyton House/March team in 1988, Newey’s first real opportunity to prove his worth was following his move to Williams in 1991. The Grove based British racing team had been enjoying unprecedented success in the late 1980’s and with one of the best drivers and budgets in the field Newey and technical director Patrick Head quickly became a dominant F1 design partnership in the early 1990’s.

1994 was to be a defining year for Newey who found his challenger for that season unable to complete with the Rory Burns designed Benetton. The came Imola and the death of Ayrton Senna, which threatened possible manslaughter charges against the man who designed a potentially ‘faulty’ race car. … READ MORE