FOM turn down Andretti’s bid to enter Formula 1 in next two seasons

Formula 1

Posted on

| Written by

Formula One Management have rejected an application by Andretti to join F1 in 2025 or 2026, claiming the team would not “add value to the championship.”

Andretti’s application to join the world championship in either 2025 or 2026 was approved by the sport’s governing body, the FIA, who opened a process for an 11th team early last year.

However, the team required approval from the commercial rights holders, FOM, who have the power to decide whether to accept an 11th team to receive a share of television revenue and prize money provided to the existing teams.

FOM believe adding an extra team to the existing 10 “would not, in and of itself, provide value to the championship.”

They listed further reasons for declining Andretti’s entry. FOM pointed out the team does not have a deal in place for a supply of engines, and would have to be allocated one in accordance with F1’s rules, which it believes would weaken it.

It also questioned the wisdom of Haas considering an entry in 2025, when it would have to build a car to one set of regulations, before new rules are adopted for the following year.

However while FOM has declined Andretti the chance to enter F1 next season or the year after, it has said would look differently on an application for 2028, if it was to bring Cadillac with it as a power unit supplier.

Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and go ad-free

Statement: Formula 1 refuses to admit Andretti


1. On 22 March 2023, the FIA published an invitation (the Invitation) to apply to participate in the FIA Formula One World Championship (the Championship), to which four applicants responded, among them Andretti Formula Racing, LLC (the Applicant). The FIA conducted an initial assessment process, which included both a written question and response element and an in-person meeting.

2. The FIA announced on 2 October 2023 that they were satisfied that the application submitted by the Applicant (the Application) fulfilled their selection criteria in all material respects, and that accordingly, the FIA considered that the Applicant should progress to the next stage of the agreed process as set out in the Invitation, being an assessment by the Commercial Rights Holder of the Applicant’s value to the Championship. The process set out in the Invitation provides that both the FIA and the Commercial Rights Holder must consider an application suitable in order for a new entrant to be selected.

3. The FIA had previously shared with us the materials submitted by each of the four applicants in response to the Invitation, which we had studied. Following the FIA’s announcement, we wrote to the Applicant on 10 October 2023, setting out the assessment process, and details of the considerations and decision-making process pursuant to which we would conduct our commercial assessment (the Process Letter). The Process Letter contained a list of questions for the Applicant, to which the Applicant provided responses on 24 October 2023.
4. Having had the opportunity to consider the Applicant’s responses together with our own deliberations, we subsequently wrote to the Applicant on 12 December 2023 extending an invitation to an in-person meeting at our offices in order for the Applicant to present its application, but the Applicant did not take us up on this offer.
5. This document summarises our review process and the key conclusions arising from it.
Review process
6. As contemplated by the Process Letter, we took account of the broad range of ways in which value could be provided, including value to fans, the prestige and reputational value of the sport, the competitive balance of the Championship and the sustainability goals of the sport. The key areas of review were:
a. consideration of the likely competitiveness of the Applicant’s entry, and its impact on value;
b. consideration of the Applicant’s arrangements with respect to the supply of Power Units and the impact that those arrangements would have on the Applicant’s competitive performance;
c. research into the potential benefits the Applicant might bring in terms of fan growth, and fan engagement, as well as a review of the equivalent materials prepared by C|T Group on behalf of the Applicant;
d. consultation with key stakeholders to understand their view of the value that the Applicant would bring;
we took account of the impact of the entry of an 11th team on all commercial stakeholders in the Championship.

Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and go ad-free

8. Our assessment process has established that the presence of an 11th team would not, in and of itself, provide value to the Championship.
9. Any 11th team should show that its participation and involvement would bring a benefit to the Championship. The most significant way in which a new entrant would bring value is by being competitive, in particular by competing for podiums and race wins. This would materially increase fan engagement and would also increase the value of the Championship in the eyes of key stakeholders and sources of revenue such as broadcasters and race promoters.
10. The Application contemplates an association with General Motors (GM) that does not initially include a PU supply, with an ambition for a full partnership with GM as a PU supplier in due course, but this will not be the case for some years. Having a GM PU supply attached to the Application at the outset would have enhanced its credibility, though a novice constructor in partnership with a new entrant PU supplier would also have a significant challenge to overcome. Most of the attempts to establish a new constructor in the last several decades have not been successful.
11. 2025 will be the last year of the current regulatory cycle and 2026 will be the first year of the subsequent cycle, for which an entirely different car to the previous cycle will be required. The Applicant proposes, as a novice constructor, to design and build a car under the 2025 regulations, and then in the very next year to design and build a completely different car under the 2026 regulations. Further, the Applicant proposes to attempt this with a dependency on a compulsory supply from a rival PU manufacturer that will inevitably be reticent to extend its collaboration with the Applicant beyond the minimum required while the Applicant pursues its ambition of collaborating with GM as a PU supplier in the longer term, which a compulsory PU supplier would see as a risk to its intellectual property and know-how.
12. We do not believe that there is a basis for any new applicant to be admitted in 2025 given that this would involve a novice entrant building two completely different cars in its first two years of existence. The fact that the Applicant proposes to do so gives us reason to question their understanding of the scope of the challenge involved. While a 2026 entry would not face this specific issue it is nevertheless the case that Formula 1, as the pinnacle of world motorsport, represents a unique technical challenge to constructors of a nature that the Applicant has not faced in any other formula or discipline in which it has previously competed, and it proposes to do so with a dependency on a compulsory PU supply in the initial years of its participation. On this basis, we do not believe that the Applicant would be a competitive participant.

Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and go ad-free

13. Coming to the sport as a new PU manufacturer is also a huge challenge, with which major automotive manufacturers have struggled in the past, and one which can take a manufacturer a number of years of significant investment in order to become competitive. GM have the resource and credibility to be more than capable of attempting this challenge, but success is not assured.
Conclusions of commercial assessment
14. Our assessment process has established that the presence of an 11th team would not, on its own, provide value to the Championship. The most significant way in which a new entrant would bring value is by being competitive. We do not believe that the Applicant would be a competitive participant.
15. The need for any new team to take a compulsory power unit supply, potentially over a period of several seasons, would be damaging to the prestige and standing of the Championship.
16. While the Andretti name carries some recognition for F1 fans, our research indicates that F1 would bring value to the Andretti brand rather than the other way around.
17. The addition of an 11th team would place an operational burden on race promoters, would subject some of them to significant costs, and would reduce the technical, operational and commercial spaces of the other competitors.
18. We were not able to identify any material expected positive effect on CRH financial results, as a key indicator of the pure commercial value of the Championship.
19. On the basis of the application as it stands, we do not believe that the Applicant has shown that it would add value to the Championship. We conclude that the Applicant’s application to participate in the Championship should not be successful.
20. We would look differently on an application for the entry of a team into the 2028 Championship with a GM power unit, either as a GM works team or as a GM customer team designing all allowable components in-house. In this case there would be additional factors to consider in respect of the value that the Applicant would bring to the Championship, in particular in respect of bringing a prestigious new OEM to the sport as a PU supplier.

Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and go ad-free

Formula 1

Browse all Formula 1 articles

Author information

Keith Collantine
Lifelong motor sport fan Keith set up RaceFans in 2005 - when it was originally called F1 Fanatic. Having previously worked as a motoring...

Got a potential story, tip or enquiry? Find out more about RaceFans and contact us here.

127 comments on “FOM turn down Andretti’s bid to enter Formula 1 in next two seasons”

  1. Enormously short-sighted decision from FOM but completely unsurprising. The teams have such a vested interest in ensuring the grid doesn’t expand. It’s clearly bad for the sustainability of the sport to not expand. The grid needs a minimum of 24 cars in my opinion.

    1. I agree – the last two F2 champs don’t have rides and countless others have flocked to WEC and other series over the years. If I was Andretti, I’d drop the whole plan and sit back and watch the popularity fall rapidly in the next 4 years after another 50 Max / Red Bull wins, along with Alpine dropping out entirely, not to mention who knows what will happen with Haas.

      1. @gitanes that said, have there not also been questions in the motorsport world about whether the Andretti’s expansions plans for the future risked over-extending themselves?

        Furthermore, there have been questions about the Andretti’s plans to develop their new facility in Indiana, which was supposed to be supporting their bid to enter Formula 1.

        The original plan was for that facility to open in 2025 – already rather marginal for Michael’s proposal to enter Formula 1 in 2025 – but, back in May 2023, a dispute broke out between the single-purpose entity that the Andretti’s and Bradford Allen Realty Services had set up to run the project, named Cardinal XLIIII, and the design and build contractor Dillon Construction Group (DCG for short).

        DCG is currently in the process of suing Cardinal XLIIII and Bradford Allen, having accused them of not paying them around $1.2 million for design work and infringing on their copyright to the design of the buildings. Construction appears to have been frozen since May 2023, which is when DCG was ordered to leave the site, and that is expected to be the case for the foreseeable future as the lawsuits are still ongoing.

        It therefore means that construction work is already 7 months behind schedule, and that is only getting worse – getting that facility built and operational before the 2025 season looks unrealistic, and even getting it ready by 2026 may be optimistic if that dispute drags on for much longer.

        The way that the Andretti’s were planning to run the team also seems rather complicated. Autosport has reported that Michael’s plans had the race team and design departments based in one facility in Silverstone, the aerodynamics department at Toyota’s wind tunnel in Cologne, the simulation, vehicle dynamics and R&D team at the GM Motorsports facility in Charlotte and the new facility in Indiana would be responsible for manufacturing components.

        Considering that other teams have talked about it being difficult to manage two different entities and working in two different countries, it does seem unusual for Andretti to have taken that to an even greater extreme than any other team.

      2. Maybe all that is true….but is there a better alternative to an 11th and 12th team, which is what the sport was intended to have for over a decade now? Would Hi-Tech and their Russian finances be a more solid option? When did F1 become a private club? When was that press conference held? I’m okay with riding out the politics of F1, but the wording of the FOM rejection of Andretti was the most pathetic statement I’ve ever read from any motorsport governing body in my 40 plus years of following. If I had anything to do with drafting a single sentence in that document, I’d be utterly embarrassed. It was false, tactless, vindictive, and completely ignored the fact that the FIA itself tendered an detailed application process that was fully vetted and accepted Andretti. So the FOM isn’t on the same page as the FIA you say?? Then get your S&*$ together. Geez, I even watched the sprint races without complaint. But this farce is 10 times worse than any stupid attempt to spice up the show for more money.

    2. Yeah, not a surprise, but not a good step at all.

    3. Agreed 100%

    4. I am extremely fed up with this elite circus that pretends to be a “sport”. Let’s be honest, it turned into freaking WWE. For the first time ever I’m ready to leave F1 behind and move on.

      We can moan online all we want. But March 1st we are all behind the telly again.. nothing changes unless the fans walk away.

      1. Couldn’t agree more. The people in power are happy to keep the “sport” stagnant while the money is flowing.

    5. Hugely disappointed. More cars are great for the fans. FOM acted incredibly selfishly here. Between this and Abu Dhabi 2021, I’m getting more and more jaded & disguised by this sport.

    6. The tail wagging the dog

  2. Pitiful. Selfish. Greedy.
    The teams should be shamed of themselves.
    Formula One is now a closed cartel of self-appointed ringmasters.

    1. Pitiful. Selfish. Greedy.
      The teams should be shamed of themselves.

      Much as I dislike the heavy bias toward the “anything for more money, stuff the consumer” that FOM seems to have, they are a business.
      More, they are a business that is reliant on the brand. Anyone wanting to join the branded train needs to convince the owners of the brand that they will increase the brand value.
      Andretti waved the GM flag as an inducement to let them in, but failed to line up GM as a partner for day one of their entry and thus devalued their offering.

      As to the teams – their input is only one part of the info that FOM will have had before them.

      Lastly, the pointing at Haas and noting that they aren’t overly competitive, but were let in;
      Haas joined in 2014 and Bernie didn’t sell the rights until 2016. In 2014 the main question was did Bernie want you there, and comment to the contrary from other teams would probably get a Foxtrot Oscar from Bernie by reply.
      I think you could probably ascribe a failure to improve by Haas to changes in regulations that limited the scope of bought in components and thus reduced their similarity to last year’s Ferrari.

  3. Unbelievable.

    No, wait.
    I meant totally foreseeable…

    To be honest, this is actually good, as it will put more pressure on the partnership between the FIA and Liberty.
    This division will hurt Liberty and F1 far more than the FIA.

  4. Come on Michael, do the decent thing and buy Haas. You’ll relieve us from them, while showing the other teams you can do whatever it takes to join them!

    1. Yes, please.

    2. @fer-no65 They have spoked to Gene Haas but he isn’t interested in selling.

      They looked at Sauber & Alpha Tauri as well.

      One of the first things Liberty did was move to make teams franchises which immediately saw the value of each team skyrocket to the point where outside of a big manufacturer it’s going to be basically impossible for private/independent entities to buy any of the existing teams.

      1. That actually diminishes the value of the teams for the pool of potential buyers is small.

        Book value may be high but if the pool of potential buyers is counted in the fingers of one hand, actual value is somewhat just above zero and worse, may become a burden on the current owners pocket to maintain the book value.

        Imagine Haas, Alpine, or Williams running out of top line revenue and having to sell. Who would buy at the book value? Noone for it would become a fire sale at greatly reduced price from the book value

        I think this is the reason the teams voted against the dilution, none of the teams have any income stream sufficient for the book value to be realised by a sale. There simply is not a return on investment (ROI) on offer.

        An investor would be better to buy a football club where at least they can trade players for income.

        Worse will be if any team simply “pulls the plug” and shuts up shop. Not inconceivable that Haas, Alpine and even Williams simply closes their doors.

        Where will F1 get the next team entries from? Having burnt at least one bridge (Andretti) ask yourself who will be the next bridge builder?

      2. One of the first things Liberty did was move to make teams franchises which immediately saw the value of each team skyrocket to the point where outside of a big manufacturer it’s going to be basically impossible for private/independent entities to buy any of the existing teams.

        A seller can’t decide what a thing is worth, only the buyer can; and nobody is buying.

        The last F1 team that was sold is Williams, and that was reportedly sold for about $200 million.

        The idea that F1 teams – even totally uncompetitive ones – are now ‘worth’ over a billion dollars is, at best, delusional.

      3. To get the best price for your team you tell someone it is not for sale.Andretti is not used to people saying no…good chance haas can get his money back…..poss keep a minority share for a year….Andretti will get there

    3. I don’t want them to buy an existing team. I want more teams. Nothing can replace that.

    4. You can’t buy something if the owner doesn’t want to sell and offering several billions is way too much for Haas to buy.
      Just add extra teams but i think there are incoming law suits against the FOM and they will be force to add Andretti.

  5. If you read FOM’s statement dispassionately, analytically, and w/o emotion, it’s hard to argue with anything they assert. The fact is that adding an 11th team dilutes revenues to existing teams by ten percent, or reduces the share of EBITDA available to FOM. Formula One is a business, and the business case they are making is not wrong.
    If you want to place blame, place it on Bernie and his investors for extracting more than $12 billion over the years, thereby saddling the business with a capital structure that requires a return on investment and dictates almost every major decision that fans view as negative or dysfunctional.

    1. The problem is that they want new teams to fight for wins and podiums to engange new fans. Yet the fact is more than half of the grid doesn’t do that already. Why should a new team cope with the burden of being competitive enough to benefit F1 as a whole, when there are already entities failling to do so? even the team being paid a plus because of “heritage” doesn’t win regularly enough…

      It’d be much better if the argument said: “look, there’s a limit to the money we all earn, and bringing a new guy would dilute that. End of story”. At least they’d be honest, and it’d be understandable. They list operational costs, and so many other random arguments, but nothing about prize money and dilluting what all the teams earn.

      1. I suppose the argument might be that if Andretti were top-three out of the box, that might bring in a lot of new, American, DTS, television viewers and increase the value of the US TV rights. I can see that. On the other hand, if Andretti is trundling around at the back it’s harder to make the revenue case.

        The bottom line is that this should be a sport, not a business. The sport should not have to earn a return on $12 billion of invested capital, when most of that capital is just goodwill that has zero to do with operating the sport. But that ship has sailed.

        1. The bottom line is that this should be a sport, not a business. The sport should not have to earn a return on $12 billion of invested capital, when most of that capital is just goodwill that has zero to do with operating the sport. But that ship has sailed.

          Indeed, but they’re all in on this proverbial ship. When the FIA noted the dangers of loading up F1 with a massive ‘investment’ that needs to be recouped (i.e. extracted) the FIA president was instantly smeared and personally attacked by a wide variety of for-hire ‘journalists’ dancing to Liberty and the teams’ tune.

    2. The prize pot amount was set with 11 teams in mind, was it not? Meaning that the 10 teams have technically being receiving bonus payments because there was no 11th team to pay.

      So no, it doesn’t dilute the revenues, it simply puts them back to the rightful amount it should have been.

    3. Even when Liberty and the teams had 100% control over the situation, you still find a reason to blame Ecclestone.

      1. Because I understand corporate finance in general, and this FOM business model in particular.
        I like Bernie, have met with him several times. I’m not blaming him, I said if if you want to place blame, then that is where it belongs. The capital structure is the issue that drives all of these decisions and the capital structure exists because of Bernie and CVC.

        1. This ! F1 stopped being the pinnacle of motorsport when it was sold to a private equity in 2005 by non other than Ecclestone. CVC’s sole interest in the sport was profit maximization through revenue maximization, cost-cutting, and gaining from selling an overpriced product.

    4. It hurts the revenue to teams and FOM only if one thinks the the only path to increased top line is more races. You have to improve the product and get more customers. Andretti is an obvious way to do that. They should be begging them to join. It would explode US F1 interest overnight. More eyeballs, more merchandise sold, mire social media, more TV money, and all before Andretti even has a running car. It would give them a possible focus of US attention for after Hamilton retires.

    5. To the contrary.

      #8 is an opinion, not a fact. That the people involved have a financial stake in this invalidates much of their opinion.
      #9 is irrelevant, most teams in F1 are not competitive for podiums and wins.
      #10 is irrelevant, as most existing constructors are only successful in the sense that they’re not bankrupt, and the only new engine manufacturer to join F1 since the early 2000s is… the world champion.
      #11 has some merit in so far as the bridge-year is concerned, this is a weakness of Andretti’s bid.
      #12 is irrelevant, as all teams need to build two different cars and there are already rules in place that would prevent a team participating if they are too slow.
      #13 is irrelevant, as success cannot be guaranteed, and both Renault and Ferrari have not won anything of note in over 15 years and nobody advocates booting them from the series.

    6. Further to the comment above, it is not up to FOM to decide on a team being included in the Championship (the races based on the sporting regulations). This is FIA’s responsibility and they already approved it.

      What’s interesting that I cannot find a very clear conclusions (only some statements) which decided that they cannot enter. The only comment to that effect is: “We conclude that the Applicant’s application to participate in the Championship should not be successful.” (notice the ‘as it stands’ and ‘should’).
      I guess if Andretti rocks up next year or the year after, and their car ticks all the boxes, then they can race in F1. Maybe with out any price money.

      Liberty made a mistake a few years ago by not forcing the sport to become a franchise system. They tried, but only in a half hearted way.
      If it were a franchise system then it would be easier to keep the door closed.

      All in all I think either Andretti agrees on a way to enter with FOM, or Andretti will go to court in Europe (where they take a dim view on this kind of monopolistic behaviour).

  6. What is the FOM’s legit description of how Haas adds value?

  7. I would be thrilled to see Andretti rock up to the first event of 2025 with two cars ready to go, having passed all FIA safety tests.
    There’s nothing Liberty or the other teams can do to prevent Andretti from participating in the season. The only control they have is where the money goes and where the TV cameras are pointing.

    1. lol nice one. Just like the unwanted relatives who park out the front of your house in their winnebago at christmas.

      ” Just need somewhere to plug in my power cord. Should be long enough to reach your shed out back!”

  8. It would have been more convenient if they have issued a statement and said that rejecting Andretti is part of power struggle between F1 and the FIA, period. All the rest is just BS.

  9. “a new entrant would bring value is by being competitive, in particular by competing for podiums and race wins” if this is their reason, they’ll never allow anybody else in.
    It’s all just pure greed!

  10. Since I can’t put what I think i’ll just link to James Hunt saying it for me.

    1. Well said.

  11. FOM have determined that accepting Andretti joining the grid would “not, in and of itself, provide value to the championship.”

    This is such a weak argument, absolute drab. An extra team would mean: more cars, more drivers, more career opportunities = more stories, more entertainment etc. No matter what their performance might be. Give it a year and the FOM might need to eat dirt and beg for any team to join – with another year of Red Bull (and possibly RB) dominance in the stars – doubts about the future of both Alpine and Haas – the arrogance of FOM might come back to hunt them. Also turning down an American manufacturer like Cadillac is beyond me.

  12. So that’s that then, we get to see the same 10 teams wandering around in more or less the same order season after season, because it safeguards revenue!!
    F1 needs two more teams (even if only the top 10 get prize money) the current grid is stagnant as is the sport as a whole and the best that Liberty et al can offer is “Sprints” and Street circuits. Pathetic.

    1. If I could control what every fan does in answer to this, no ticket to any f1 event would be bought ever again until they let andretti, and whoever meets the requirements in, I’m sure they’d backtrack immediately!

  13. Well, I guess now Andretti will need them to buy Haas and force they way into F1. Disgusting and disgraceful. I’m sure that a poll asking if having Andretti as an 11th team would add value to F1 amongst F1 fans would provide a different outcome from what is being stated.

    1. Problem is Haas doesn’t want to sell (they already tried that) or asking way too much for Haas isn’t Mario going to do.

  14. High time to bring this anti-competitive ‘alleged’ cartel to a court.

    Shame on them. Only four existing teams have won more than a single race since 2010.

    What are those other clowns adding to the sport?

    1. MichaelN,
      While I’m not a legal expert, the challenge lies in the fact that F1 and Liberty operate outside the jurisdiction of the EU. The most they can do is potentially ban them from competing in Europe, but considering the majority of races are held outside Europe, this may have limited impact.

      Forget about the USA, people often live under the illusion of democracy, whereas in reality, they are held hostage by the same corporate entities as Liberty and a few corrupt politicians.

      1. FIA is based on Paris.
        And even though FOM (Formula One Group) is incorporated in the UK, it can expect a more European view to any complaint, than it would get if it were an American organisation.

      2. It doesn’t have to be an EU body; the UK has not made meaningful changes to their competition law since leaving the EU, so they’re not suddenly a rogue anything-goes nation (although some English politicians may wish for that to change).

        Liberty and the Formula One Group also still operate in the EU for a third of their races, and two teams are based there. Effectively three if one considers Sauber’s soon-to-be owners/partners are German.

        Given the speed with which Liberty caved when Sauber and Force India raised a stink in 2015, I’m pretty sure they’re very anxious to stay out of any court – whether that’s in the UK or EU. As you, probably rightly, note it’d be different in the USA, where a sufficiently large corporation – like Liberty – might well be able to ‘arrange’ the ‘correct’ verdict with a bit of winking and nodding at the right people.

        1. Thanks for the additional info !

  15. Was the earlier article about 1989 deliberately posted today in anticipation of this news?

  16. What a joke the FOM and teams are. Shame on every single person involved.

  17. im shocked. F1 gave them no chance of success. either option they would discredit, a lose lose situation: section 10: “Having a GM PU supply attached to the Application at the outset would have enhanced its credibility, though a novice constructor in partnership with a new entrant PU supplier would also have a significant challenge to overcome.”

    “Most of the attempts to establish a new constructor in the last several decades have not been successful.”. so stop trying?

    “The fact that the Applicant proposes to do so gives us reason to question their understanding of the scope of the challenge involved” not objective AT ALL

    “GM have the resource and credibility to be more than capable of attempting this challenge, but success is not assured.” how can you ASSURE success?

    i can go on and on. wow. i love this community and following F1 but im not sure i can support this

    1. If “assured success” is somehow a requirement for engine manufacturers, surely it’s time for Alpine to pack their bags and go.

      Mercedes also hasn’t won a race in over a year…

    2. If they’re talking “several decades” surely they should be referring to Stewart F1. Look where they are now! This whole thing is silly.

  18. They want to have a street race in every major American city but Andretti doesn’t add value? Jokes. They should pay Andretti to field a team. It would be more shareholder value—-isn’t this what Jeddah, Vegas, etc are about?

  19. Michael (@freelittlebirds)
    31st January 2024, 16:35

    We’ve had 10 teams for what seems like forever now. Audi has announced its intent to join in the year 2525 to commemorate the famous song.

    If Haas was allowed to join, then why can’t another team join especially if they are willing to pay the anti-dilution fee? It’s not like teams are lining up to join F1 and they have thousands of applications to process. Andretti is a famous F1 name and Cadillac is also a car manufacturer.

    Would they reject Schumacher-Porsche? I suppose they’d have to. I would love to see them lose in court and pay $1 billion in fines or something like that.

    This takes away 2 driver spots in addition to increased competition.

    1. why can’t another team join

      Haas joined when the payout structure was significantly different, and people felt they had nothing to fear from them.

      Back in 2015, Sauber and Force India filed a complaint with the European Commission that argued FOM was acting like a cartel and abusing its dominant market position. They dropped the case because Liberty allegedly “brought a new culture of transparency to the sport and illustrates willingness to debate fundamental issues such as the distribution of the prize fund monies”.

      In other words; they were essentially bought off, and all the teams now get a guaranteed and much bigger slice of the pie. And like a bunch of toddlers with a new toy, they don’t want to share.

  20. How predictably sad state of affairs.

    …anyway, FIA has accepted them into the sport of Formula 1 so I guess we’re going to see Andretti break all kinds of records,in which ever FIA accredited race on a Grade 1 track they show up to race as the single entrant in a category.
    Untelevised on the platform where the others are, of course.
    I mean, there’s only one channel and only one track in the world, right ?

  21. If association with an F1 World Championship winner doesn’t bring a brand value, then what exactly is the brand benefits of F1 in the first place? Wonder if F1 will one-two punch the traditional fan base with a Reverse Grid announcement this year? That’ll be interesting to keep an eye on.

  22. 1. This effectively means no GM / Cadillac either, since they said they will only work with Andretti – and it is entirely unrealistic to expect an entirely new engine manufacturer entry with an entirely new team. This will have an impact with any future potential engine manufacturers too.

    2. There is actually 26 places on an F1 grid, and the last time it has been fully populated was Monaco 1995. Since then, we the fans have been short-changed, paying the full price for 75% of the product being delivered by F1 / FOM. If anything, the existing teams should subsidize potential new entries until the grid is once again filled to capacity.

  23. Just sheer greed by the teams and f.o.m nothing more to it yes 25 was abit much but they could have been on the grid in 26 renault said they would supply them an engine (yes i know tht agreement end) but would be to hard to get a new one

  24. It’s interesting to see how the FOM doesn’t think the most popular American race team can provide value.

    The competitiveness argument could also be used to exclude certain current teams on the grid.

    Also the argument that either with a customer PU or their own PU they wouldn’t be competitive, seems to be a very weak argument just looking for an excuse not accept Andretti.

  25. >It also questioned the wisdom of Haas considering an entry in 2025
    Is anyone able to expand on the brief mention of this? I’m not sure I understand the first bit – the second part about regulation changes between 2025/26 makes sense but were Haas poised for a second entry in the new team application process?

    1. Haas = Andretti

  26. I guess the idea is to drain money from the American market through hosting fees rather than giving anything back in a sporting sense. A shortsighted, and ultimately self-destructive, decision. Yuck.

  27. This is such crap. If you have the money and you can field a team, there’s no reason to not let in new teams. So disappointed in this ruling.

  28. How absolutely disgusting. I would swear heavily in my comments if it would not block my comment.

    1. It’s disgusting he wants to come in and steal money from the other teams.

      1. … after paying a $200 million USD ransom to get in– which by the way, would offset ANY losses for at least 3 years.

      2. This is a fair point; the motivations of Andretti to join are not necessarily all sunshine and roses.

        But this still doesn’t really make it an argument against them, because the same is true for teams like Haas, Sauber, Williams, and Red Bull’s test team. None of them are making any meaningful investments; they’re just hanging around and living off the money generated by teams like Ferrari, Mercedes, Red Bull and to a lesser extent McLaren.

        These are not competitive, which is apparently now a requirement, are not making any investments to change this, and they aren’t even bringing new talent into the sport.

        1. Williams wanted to make the investment in facilities to try and close the gap but they were rejected so a new team can’t enter because they won’t be competitive and an existing team can’t overspend to catch up because of the cap so there are maybe 3 teams that have a chance.

  29. What a joke. I honestly never thought I’d miss Bernie Ecclestone.

    I do.

  30. Formula 1 truly is the Nintendo of motorsports. Living off its brand while forgetting its roots. Driven by greed and corporate decisions.

    1. How absolutely DISGUSTING !!!! No watch f1 fans boycot fom liverti !!!!

    2. Nintendo has stayed fairly true to their video gaming roots. That’s one of the reasons why they’re still in business and thriving. They’ve always focused on quality over quantity for their in house first party games (and they’ve always been protective of their IP, even when they started out). The only exception in recent times have been Pokemon 3D games, which is more second party as it’s made by Game Freak who are co-own the Pokemon Company with Nintendo.

      Unless you mean their old playing cards business….which is what the company started out 100+ years ago. In which case, yea getting out of that as the main business was a good idea!

  31. shortsighted and stupid. F1 really is the elitist, pretentious and closed-off series that all its critics call it.

  32. I think that we, the audience, will degrade your precious value if you continue to treat us like useful idiots. I’m losing interest in this sport gradually, and motorsport is the only sport I really care about these days. I’m sorry, but if you turn sport into business-only kind of a deal; what is my interest to follow it? What VALUE do I get? Not much at the moment to be honest.

  33. Disappointed but not surprised. Also amused that “Andretti F1” would ‘not add value to the championship’ but VisaCashApp Racing Bulls & Kick Stake Sauber or whatever its called does.

    1. For starters, they’ve been there for awhile and proven their worth. And they stuck with F1 during the pandemic uncertainty and not just want to come in during good times and steal other teams revenue with little risk.

      1. Explain the ‘stealing’
        (to yourself).

        Dislike them as much as you want, but don’t claim/allege something which is factually incorrect.

      2. their worth

        Sauber’s ‘worth’ in the V6 years is hardly a ‘contribution’ by the FOM’s own standards – which is apparently now defined in writing as competing for podiums and wins. They’ve finished those seasons in 9th, 6th, 9th, 8th, 8th, 8th, 10th, 10th, 8th, 10th. The 6th place in 2022 was a fluke on the back of strong start to the season with the new regulations, and they barely scored any more points after race 9. If it hadn’t been for Manor limping along for a bit, Sauber would have finished absolutely last no fewer than three times.

        It’d be hard for any team to do worse.

      3. There would be no stealing… F1 payouts is already set up for 11 teams, and in the absense of an 11th team the extra money has been shared between the 10 teams, meaning they were getting more than standard because there was an excess. If only one of Lotus/Manor/HRT survived there would have been 11 teams.

        It is no surprise F1 is acting in the interests of the teams, when one of it’s own is a de-facto team owner via marriage.

  34. Michael, quit wasting time and money on this. They don’t deserve the Andretti brand. Start working on efforts to cancel F1 races in the US, and win the IndyCar championship.

  35. If the applicant were a group of Saudi Arabians F1 would have bent over backwards to approve the entry. The supposed justification is trash. Two teams have been missing for too long. Fill the slots and stop pretending there is some kind of limit to 10 teams. There is no precedent for the teams to assume no more teams would be added. If they can’t compete they can pack up their dozens of trailers and leave.

    1. Andretti should have come in during the last Concorde Agreement then when you know, things look uncertain and risky as opposed to now, when things are looking up.

  36. I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again…

    Any team that can build a car that meets the regulations and the 107% qualifying rule deserves a place on the grid and a share of the price money of they earn any.

    Formula one should be about the competition and not the prevention of it, or the protection of financial interests.

  37. F1 needs Andretti more than Andretti needs F1

  38. This position of lacking value being added is odd and therefore implies that all existing 10 entrants provide more value than a potential Andretti entry.

    I am pretty confident that if FOM hypothetically rescinded all entries and said they would re-allocate 10 entries to the 10 teams delivering the most value then we would have a different grid to what we have today and that Andretti would be in it.

  39. Good and stay out.

    1. Michael (@freelittlebirds)
      31st January 2024, 21:39

      @Yaru Why?

  40. This is Liberty Merda.
    Never think about stopping watching F1, I’m following it since I was 4, but Liberty is making my love with F1 very very difficult. American clown show

  41. Yes (@come-on-kubica)
    31st January 2024, 18:12

    Liberty are fast turning into CVC. Absolutely waste of time having them and the sport will be worse off when they leave again. This should have been approved with no issue. Nearly.decade since a new team joined which is an absolutely joke.

  42. I’m not saying this frequently, hardly ever actually, about a sport…..but I am almost ashamed I like a sport that treats its interested potential participants like this. If something has to be an added value, but Andretti isn’t….than also axe the ones that don’t add anything. Haas to begin with. I strongly disliked the monotony 1 team had last year, despite it having my favorite driver (Perez), but this I dislike even more.

    Also, if the prize money only goes to the 11 best, than there is all the more a fight for that position, instead of limping around at the back being guaranteed a few bucks at the end. Fight for it, don’t count on it, like in most of life.

    Would almost want to see a system that switches the worst of F1 and best of F2 every season….nowhere realistic, I know, but even that would make more sense than what’s going on right now.

    Wondering what WOULD have an added value for the commercial rights holders though. This is like firing a vice president for not being influential enough.

    1. Yes, I like your f1-f2 switch idea.

  43. Based on this logic, I expect Haas and Sauber to have their entries revoked– after all, they add nothing to the championship, and their exclusion would increase revenue for all existing teams.

    What a bunch of greedy, narrow-minded, parochial pinheaded, short-sighted jack@#$%.

  44. We’re denied a team with Andretti emblazoned on its cars but have to put up with Visa Cash App RB.

    The world’s gone mad!

    1. Michael (@freelittlebirds)
      31st January 2024, 21:35

      Yeah, bonkers…

  45. Time to bring out pitchforks.


    F1 could do with extra 4-8 cars.

    I hope Audi and Porsche are joining soon.

  46. Sad really very sad state of affairs in F1 with this being the FOM verdict on a team wanting to join F1. Funny that from the FIA F1 side we are getting questionares and polls to engage the fans and FOM is doing exactly the opposite from what the F1 fans want. Almost all the comments I have read here show disappointment with the outcome. If this is the average reaction of F1 fans, then surely FOM does know how to alienate itself from its fans. But I guess they do not care about the fans, only about their money.

  47. This is a joke. Till FOM drop the ultra greed I’ll be pirating the coverage. You don’t get my cash by being this greedy and elitist. The grid holds more cars so let them in already.

  48. I sent my thoughts to

  49. No FOM, No No FOM, this is so not right!

  50. I’d immediately canceled my F1 TV Pro subscription. Nor will I visit any GP or buy any merch until such time that Andretti, FIA and most importantly the EU, beat the greedy FOM and the teams into submission by any means necessary. I may still watch some free F1 content but an organization that’s fighting against me and the majority of F1 fans’ wishes does not deserve any of my money. They’d decided to sacrifice the long term future of the sport in the name of short term greed that’s their choice. But I’m not onboard. After 30 years of being primarily an F1 fan I’ll concentrate on other, better governed, series from now on. Damn, and I thought Liberty were better than the poison dwarf…

    1. Wish everyone did that and everyone stopped buying tickets, you’d see them backtrack!

  51. Who’d have thought the teams with Cash, Stake and Money(-Gram) in their names would add more value to the championship?

    My suggestion: get your 2028 entry in (but don’t enter a year early – that never goes well – see Lola 1997 & Honda 2015) and name the team after Mario instead of Michael.

  52. Right decision. They need strong american team right from the start. Not another US F1 (remember?) project.

    1. Michael (@freelittlebirds)
      31st January 2024, 21:53

      It’s impossible to be strong right from the start. It’s the ability to have the support and funds to remain in the game and develop or disrupt so you eventually get the chance to become strong. That or you find the next Adrian Newey…

      The barriers to entry in F1 are massive. Haas’ model was always to remain a mid or lower tier team.

      1. My thougts entirely. It is ludicrous to assume any entry would enter as anything other than a lower midfield to back running team. In fact, lower midfield would be a momumental acheivement.

        1. Mmm, mercedes entered as a midfield (not lower) in 2010.

  53. Michael (@freelittlebirds)
    31st January 2024, 21:44

    Here’s a question that I’m curious to hear people’s thoughts on.

    A lot of the teams were started by racing drivers.

    Shouldn’t a WDC champion have a right to start their own F1 team? Shouldn’t this decision rest with the drivers when a driver wants to start a team?

    1. It’s just such an iconic racing name. I’d have thought they’d jump at the chance to get the name in the sport for marketing if nothing else. Makes no sense.

  54. To be honest I really hope that F1 andmost other forms mond class specific safety and tor racing part ways with the FIA it’s a corrupt body that needs to be replaced with a body less interested in Making money for themselves and forcing crazy rules and replace it with a body that is more interested in what’s good for the sport, next we need to force liberty media out, they serve no useful purpose other than being a leech and create governing body just for F1, F2 etc that is also under control of the overall motorsports body for venue and rights negotiations.

  55. i sincerely hope Gene Haas gets fed up with his team’s failures and withdraws it this year without notice.

    These F’ers deserve a pathetic grid with 18 cars, or even less.

    A few more years and Michael will be too old to insist and will just go home.

  56. Perhaps more of a moderate surprise than a complete shock. But still, very very dispaointing.

    If it were not for my desire to continue watching the sport I would otherwise hope this decision would come back to bite them. But does this mean I am no different, as this means I am hoping for F1 to thrive for my own ‘selfish’ reasons rather than wishing for a befitting negative outcome.

    1. I like f1, but I have no problem if they end up closing as a consequence of this decision, I’m very vindictive.

  57. Martin Bradley MORRIS
    1st February 2024, 0:53

    How come Andretti is under all this scrutiny to enter F1 when he could simply buy a current team (If one was for sale) no questions asked. That is exactly what Audi have done with Sauber. If Andretti bought another team right now, he would be on the grid this year. If Andretti is being classed as a novice to the sport, Audi should be treated the same.
    The whole thing smells and has done nothing to enhance the profile and image of F1.

    1. How come Andretti is under all this scrutiny to enter F1 when he could simply buy a current team (If one was for sale)

      You just answered your own question. Nobody is willing to sell to Andretti.

  58. Asinine! NO ONE can “prove their worth” unless they are in the series, but Andretti can PROVE they are a legitimate race team (actually “teams”). They should be given a chance and this shortsidedness by FOM is the type of action that will damage F1 in the coming years.

  59. Had a quick speed read through the Statement and all I saw was
    Blah blah $ blah $ $ blah $$ blah $ blah $
    You cant un-jump the Shark…. So lets talk about the serious stuff, apparently all F1 fans tell us is that they want a reverse grid fan boosted DTS scripted races….

  60. Since when did being competitive determine your value in the championship? There’s no chance Daniel Ricciardo will win this year’s Australian Grand Prix but good luck getting a ticket to the event! If competitiveness is the only measure of value, you should probably boot out 9 of the 10 teams based on the results of the last 2 years.

    1. At least halve the current grid with that argument, leave only red bull, merc cause they’re the best teams of the last 15 years, ferrari cause they’ve been around forever and are generally competitive, and give a year to mclaren and aston martin (as they were decent last year) to prove to be a top team, or get rid of them too!

  61. I went over to the “official” F1 site ( to see what they had to say – not a word! Are they so embarrassed by this decision that they pretend it didn’t happen?

    1. Yes, they are, because they know how unpopular the decision is.
      You’d think that they’d at least mention it in a way that is extremely favourable to themselves… But no – nothing at all.

Comments are closed.