f1 wealth creation
TRANSCRIPT
8/13/2019 F1 Wealth Creation
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/f1-wealth-creation 1/10
68 FALL 2013
8/13/2019 F1 Wealth Creation
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/f1-wealth-creation 2/10
69RACER.com
For more than three decades, Bernie Ecclestone has been relentlessly focused – and hugelysuccessful – in his quest to turn Formula 1 into a multi-billion dollar commercial colossus.
WORDS Caroline Reid ILLUSTRATION Paul Laguette/iStock
(RIGHT) Aged 83,
F1 supremo Bernie
Ecclestone continues
to be the prime
mover in pushing the
multi-billion dollar
business forward.
(LEFT) Ecclestone’sastute business
savvy not only grew
the sport, but made
fortunes for many of
his contemporaries.
No. 1 / THE SPORT
t’s no secret that Bernie Ecclestone is
responsible for Formula 1’s scale and reachas a truly global sport. But the extent of his
impact is only apparent when comparing
the F1 of today with how it was before the
83-year-old billionaire recognized and
nurtured its vast, underexploited potential.Four decades ago, F1 was a shadow of
what it is today. It was a disparate collection
of tracks with often lamentable safety
standards, a freewheeling circus of teams
and drivers that rarely acted in unison, and
piecemeal TV that made it a challenge to
follow for all but the most ardent fan. Sure,it had Ferrari, Monaco and Jackie Stewart,
but it was an adrenaline-fueled spectacle
despite itself. One savvy opportunist saw the
potential, however, and his transformationfrom team owner to an exponentially
Agreement, that commited them to
appear in every grand prix. The agreement
also granted FOCA, the teams’ associationheaded by Ecclestone, the TV rights to F1.
With a guaranteed grid and the broadcast
rights now “leased” to his own company,
Formula One Promotions and Administration
(FOPA), Ecclestone held all the aces. FOPA
negotiated the deals and took a share ofthe proceeds, with the rest going to the
teams and the governing body, the FIA. In
1982, he signed a three-year deal with the
I
A l a s t a i r S t a l e y / L A T
increasing role as organizer, agitator and
catalyst for change forged the modern F1.Ecclestone bought the Brabham team
at the end of 1971 and enjoyed a certain
level of success, culminating in F1 Drivers’
World Championships for Nelson Piquet in
1981 and ’83. However, the Englishmanalways had an eye on the bigger picture: TV.
Into the heart of the 1970s, teams still
made separate deals with event promoters,
and event promoters mostly made whatever
deal they could with a local TV network.
Ecclestone made inroads into organizing
teams to deal with promoters as a singleentity and formalizing TV deals when
possible. But the defining moment came in
1981 when, after a period of conflict with
F1’s governing body, the FIA, he persuadedthe teams to sign a contract, the Concorde
European Broadcasting Union which would
ensure consistent coverage in F1’s biggest
markets in Europe.At last, the pieces of the puzzle were in
place. With guaranteed TV, sponsor rates
rocketed and teams morphed into the
high-tech powerhouses they are today. At
the same time, drivers like Alain Prost,
Ayrton Senna and Nigel Mansell becamehousehold names to further fuel F1’s
superheated growth spurt.
In 1990 FOPA had revenues of just
$14.6m, but by 1995 this had ballooned
to $129.7m and Ecclestone’s salary of$85.1m made him the world’s highest-
paid executive. He still wasn’t satisfied. He
had turned 65 and suffered from heart
problems which culminated in him having
a triple bypass in 1999. The outlook wasfar from clear and Ecclestone wanted to
leave a significant financial legacy for his
“F1 was an adrenaline-fueledspectacle despite itself.One savvy opportunist saw
the potential, however”
8/13/2019 F1 Wealth Creation
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/f1-wealth-creation 3/10
70 FALL 2013
now ex-wife Slavica, who he had married
in 1985, and their two young children.
Ecclestone’s initial idea was to float
FOPA, but he was told this would be toughsince it did not directly own the commercial
rights to F1. They are ultimately owned by
the FIA, which had granted them to the
teams, who let FOPA manage them. To
swerve around this, the FIA transferred toEcclestone’s personal investment vehicle,
FOCA Administration (now Formula OneManagement), the commercial rights to
The best business move of his career had
handed him the keys to the billionaires’ club.
Since then, Ecclestone has made $3.9bn
from selling stakes in the company and
taking out loans secured on its revenues.Despite the company changing hands
repeatedly, he’s managed to stay in the
driving seat. Crucially, he also ensured that
F1’s main revenue streams stayed within
the company. Many major sports let venues
arrange the advertising and corporatehospitality during their events, but not F1.
The latest financial statements for F1’s
parent company Delta Topco are for the
year-ending Dec. 31, 2011 and showrevenues of $1.5bn. This generally comes
from four main sources (see table, page 72).
Trackside advertising at each race and
series sponsorship comprises 15 percent
of the total revenue. This comes from
companies such as the Emirates airlineand watch manufacturer Rolex, which are
two of F1’s official partners. Corporate
hospitality, freight fees and revenues
from the GP2 and GP3 support series
add around 20 percent of the total.Fees from F1’s 63 TV contracts bring in
32 percent of the revenue and are second
only to the money received from the races
on the calendar. Together, the race hosting
fees comprise 33 percent of the total,adding up to $512m in 2011.
Just five years earlier, the revenue
from race hosting fees “only” came to
$304m. But it’s been boosted by more
than $200m, thanks to a bidding war
for the prized slots on F1’s calendar.For many countries, holding an F1 race
F1 for 14 years beginning Jan. 1, 1997.
Incredibly, in 2001, a new deal added
another100 years to the agreement, giving
a new expiration date of Dec. 31, 2110.Ecclestone owned 100 percent of
FOCA Administration, giving him complete
control of F1’s rights for the first time in
history. In return, the FIA received a paltry
annual sum of $10.3m. In 1997 alone,FOCA Administration made a net profit of
$90.7m, giving Ecclestone an annual returnon investment of more than 900 percent.
(ABOVE) TV rights
were the catalyst
that set F1 on teh
financial fast track in
the early 1980s and
they remain key today.
(ABOVE RIGHT) The
’72 season was Bernie
Ecclestone’s first year
as an F1 team owner,
helming Brabham.
YEAR
1 9 8 1
1 9 9 5
1 9 9 0
1 9 8 2
1 9 9 6
1 9 9 1
1 9 8 3
1 9 9 4
1 9 8 4
1 9 9 8
1 9 9 3
1 9 8 5
2 0 0 0
1 9 9 7
1 9 8 6
1 9 8 7
1 9 9 9
1 9 8 8
2 0 0 1
2 0 0 2
2 0 0 3
2 0 0 4
2 0 0 5
2 0 0 6
2 0 0 7
2 0 0 8
2 0 0 9
2 0 1 0
2 0 1 1
2 0 1 2
2 0 1 3
1 9 8 9
1 9 9 2
When Bernie Ecclestone rolled out the original 1981 Concorde Agreement, the document that defines
Formula 1’s commercial protocols, 10 of 15 grands prix were based in Europe. In 2013, just seven
of the 19 races were located in F1’s old heartland, with non-traditional markets now dominating.
EUROPEAN EXIT
0
201918171615
910
5
N U M B E R
O F R A
C E S14
8
13
7
12
6
11
KEY: EUROPEAN NON EUROPEAN USA
C h a r l e s C o
a t e s / L A T
L A T
h i
8/13/2019 F1 Wealth Creation
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/f1-wealth-creation 4/10
7RACER.com
No. 1 / THE SPORT
Unlike most other major sports, F1 racepromoters don’t generally get to keep any
of the revenue from trackside advertisingor corporate hospitality. Neither do they get
a share of revenue from TV broadcasting.
A race promoter’s primary source ofincome from a grand prix is usually ticket
sales, and this typically barely covers the
hosting fee paid to the Formula One Group.
According to F1’s industry monitor Formula
Money , national or local governmentsinvest almost $450m in races every year.
On average, ticket sales comprise
$22m of the $27m average revenue for
permanent circuits and $29.5m of the
$32.5m brought in by street races.
With hugely popular races such as
Singapore and Australia, street circuitsattract a higher average attendance.
Venues get around 25 percent
commission on food and drink sold at track
outlets. This brings in around $1m, whilepremium parking makes around half that.
Less obvious is that helicopter take-off
and landing slots at permanent tracks
can bring in $1.5m. The world record for
most commercial aircraft movements in asingle day is Silverstone’s heliport during
Neither is cheap, but how do F1 road and street track costs compare?
the 1999 British Grand Prix, with 4,200.It now averages 1,500 per race, with each
slot charged at approximately $1,000.Race costs differ significantly between
permanent and street tracks, with the latter
more costly to organize. The biggest cost isthe hosting fee, averaging around $27m for
both track types. However, street tracks
average $8m to rent portable pit buildings,
another $8m for safety fencing and barriers
and $14m on grandstand rentals.This gives permanent circuits total race
costs estimated at $48m, whereas street
races pay $87.5m on average. It leaves
permanent venues with an annual deficit
of $21m, with street races losing $55m.
Singapore’s government invested
$66.9m in its race last year, but the latesttrend comes from the U.S., where Texas
has an innovative scheme which could
mitigate much of the risk for governments
investing in a grand prix. The state isinvesting up to $25m annually in the
U.S. Grand Prix at Austin’s Circuit of
The America’s via a fund which makes a
payment to the race promoters based
on the amount of tax income generatedby spending as a result of the race.
PUTTING ON THE SHOW
Singapore is a popular F1
venue and a terrific advertfor the Southeast Asian
city state, but government
funding is a must.
Ticket sales $22m $27mOther revenues $5m $2.5m
TOTAL $27m $29.5m
Costs -$48m -$87.5m
LOSS BEFORE -$21m -$55m
GOVERNMENTINVESTMENT
Source: Formula Money
PERMANENT CIRCUIT VS. STREET CIRCUIT
8/13/2019 F1 Wealth Creation
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/f1-wealth-creation 5/10
72 FALL 2013
is part global coming-of-age statement,
part tourism driver, played out in front of a
massive TV audience. Last year F1 attracted
more than 500m TV viewers, making it theworld’s most-watched annual sporting
series (the Olympics and soccer’s World
Cup are bigger, but on a quadrennial basis).
In recent years, emerging economic
powerhouses like Abu Dhabi and Singaporehave woken up to the promotional power of
F1, while superpower candidates such asChina, India and – for 2014 – Russia view a
grand prix as an obligatory status symbol.
Central or regional governments are
prepared to bankroll or underwrite thehosting fees for several of the new races,
fueling a grand prix arms race and driving
by up to 10 percent annually. This goes a
long way to explain why F1 is one of thefew industries (and it is an industry) with
consistently rising revenue over the past
five years. It took in $1.07bn in 2006, rising
to $1.16bn in ’07. Since ’08, when revenue
hit $1.39bn, it’s increased at a compound
annual growth rate of 3.1 percent.F1 doesn’t own any tracks, so its costs
are kept under tight control. It only has
313 staff and its biggest single cost is the
payment of prize money to the teams (seepage 74). The bulk of it is 47.5 percent of
F1’s profits remaining after all fixed costs
have been paid. It’s split into two equal
amounts, with one half divided equally
between the top 10 teams and the otherpaid out based on final points. Heritage
payments to Ferrari and a Constructors’
Championship Bonus (CCB) divided between
Red Bull Racing, Ferrari and McLaren furtheradd to the earnings of F1’s big dogs.
Giving the top teams the richest rewards
may seem like a bad idea because it means
that the same teams are the most likely to
win. However, it helps secure F1’s future.In a sport where teams enter and exit
on a frequent basis, or change identity
almost at will, Ferrari, McLaren and,
latterly, Red Bull are marquee names,
beacons of stability, and successful, too.In total, the 2011 prize money came to
$698.5m. Although it’s F1’s biggest cost,
being a profit share links it directly to
financial performance. The more money
F1 makes, the more the teams get. In
2011, that left F1 with a $474m profit,and a great deal of media attention has
been given to how private equity firm
CVC Capital Partners benefited from this.
Last year alone, CVC netted $2.1bn
through selling 28.4 percent of F1 to threeinvestment companies. That left it with
35.5 percent, keeping it as the biggest
single shareholder. In addition, it has
received hundreds of millions of dollars individends from F1’s profits. However, CVC
has been far from the only beneficiary.Prize money rose by $450.5m in just the
four years to 2011, and since CVC bought
F1 in 2006, the teams have banked more
than $3.7bn. Even if you include the income
from the share sales, the sum that CVC hasreceived from F1 is roughly similar to the
amount received by the teams. It makes
Bernie Ecclestone’s current $3.9m salary
seem small in comparison, but such is the
gargantuan scale of F1’s finances.
After years ofreceiving little more
than pocket change,
relatively speaking,in return for handing
over the commercial
rights to Formula 1,
the FIA is set tofinally receive somemeaningful payback.
The UK’sTimes
newspaper says thatracing’s governing
body received $5m
for signing the latestConcorde Agreement,
with $200m more dueduring its eight-year
life. A share in revenue
if and when F1 ispublicly floated is also
said to be on the table.The new deal is
a considerable
improvement over
the $10.3m per yearthe FIA previously
received from F1.
FIA FLIESHIGHER WITH’13 CONCORDE
(LEFT) Ferrari and McLaren are
two of F1’s marquee brands and
that’s reflected in the prize and
bonus money they receive.
(BELOW) Bernie Ecclestone
with FIA president Jean Todt.
Here’s a breakdown of where F1’s
revenue came from in 2011, the most
recent year where full accounts are
available. Race hosting fees top the list.
Source: Formula Money
REVENUE STREAMS
Race hosting fees $512m
Television rights $489m
Trackside ads and sponsorship $222m
Corporate hospitality $80m
Feeder series $55m
Other sources $164m
TOTAL REVENUE $1.5bn
COSTS $350m
Team prize money $698.5m
UNDERLYING PROFIT $474m
“Most of F1’s key contractscontain clauses whichincrease fees paid by up
to 10 perc ent annually”
up hosting fees by $15.7m per event since2003. The average fee was $27m in 2011,
pricing many countries out of the running.It’s a particular problem in F1’s traditional
European heartland, where F1 isn’t needed
to boost tourism, or governments are
loathe to subsidize such flagrant shows of
conspicuous consumption. In the past five
years, Eurozone races have been lost inFrance, Germany, Spain and Turkey.
Making matters harder for self-financing
grands prix, most of F1’s key contracts
contain clauses which increase fees paid
S t e v e
E t h e
r i n g t o n / L A T
C h a r l e s C o a t e s / L A T
8/13/2019 F1 Wealth Creation
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/f1-wealth-creation 6/10
8/13/2019 F1 Wealth Creation
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/f1-wealth-creation 7/10
74 FALL 2013
When it comes to the all-important TV
exposure that ensures manufacturers and
sponsors are getting value for their
investment, Formula 1 is an unforgiving
meritocracy. Teams racing for the top
positions get more screen time, which
makes them more attractive propositionsto sponsors than the guys at the back.
WORDS Caroline Reid MAIN IMAGE Andy Hone/LAT
TV TIME EQUALS DOLLARS
8/13/2019 F1 Wealth Creation
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/f1-wealth-creation 8/10
75RACER.com
If you think Formula 1 teams make huge profits, think again.
Just about every last cent is spent in the pursuit of victory.
ORGANIZATIONS
Sebastian Vettel’s nine wins
from the first 15 grands prix
of 2013 gave Red Bull some
serious TV exposure. But the
correlation between winning
and screen time isn’t always
clear cut – win too easily and
the director’s going to linger
on the brawls behind you...
No. 2 / THE TEAMS
his year, the 11 teams in the Formula 1World Championship will take over $2bn
in revenue. It’s a remarkable amount to
generate from 22 drivers racing around a
track for a couple of hours 19 times a
season. However, although the teamsreceive those vast sums of money, they
will finish the year with next to no profit.
Welcome to the weird world of F1 finance.
Generally, F1 teams are run to break
even. This involves the team principalsspending whatever is available to them, and
they do it in the single-minded pursuit ofvictory. The established theory is that it’s
better to race for wins and championships
and make no profit, rather than make
money and finish low down the standings.
BUILDING VALUESimply, winning races increases the value of
the team – which gives the owners a futurepayout if and when they come to sell it. It
also increases the team’s ability to bring in
more money from sponsorship, since
brands are prepared to pay more to be
associated with a winning team.But while team owners may get a financial
return from selling a team in the long run,what’s in it for them in the short term?
If the team is owned by a private
individual, such as Sir Frank Williams, whohas a 50.8 percent stake in his eponymous
team, they can take an annual salary. This
comes out as a cost to the team just like
salaries paid to staff. Eight F1 teams are
based in the UK and therefore have to filepublicly available financial statements. The
most recent year for which a complete set
is available is 2011, and this reveals that
the team with the highest-paid director
was Red Bull Racing. Its team principal is
Christian Horner, and he’s believed tohave received the sum of $2m (£1.3m)
shown on the financial statements.
If the owner is an auto maker like
Mercedes, or a commercial concern suchas Red Bull, the benefit they get while the
team runs to break-even comes from TV
and media exposure of their brand as logos
on the cars and drivers. According to
F1’s trade guide Formula Money , Red Bull
was the most exposed brand in F1 forthe past three years. Its Advertising Value
Equivalent (AVE) – the price to buy a
similar amount of on-screen exposure –
was an estimated $414.9m in 2011. That
fell to $322.8m last year, due to SebastianVettel winning fewer races, but was still
14.2 percent of the total for all teams.
PAYING TO BE SEENIn 2011, the accounts show that F1’s
UK-based teams had average revenues of
$150.8m (£97.6m), with Red Bull highest ata staggering $273.2m (£176.8m) and
Caterham lowest at just $33.2m (£21.5m).
The teams’ revenue generally comes
from three sources, with each providing a
similar amount. They are all fueled by
T
A l a s t a i r S t a l e y / L A T
8/13/2019 F1 Wealth Creation
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/f1-wealth-creation 9/10
76 FALL 2013
F1’s huge television audience, which wasestimated at slightly more than 500m
viewers last year. The first key revenue
source is sponsorship and in this fieldmoney certainly talks. The greater the
potential exposure, the higher the cost.
Generally speaking, the rear wing,
engine cover and sidepods are the prime
logo positions, and a sponsorship dealwith a top team involving any one of
these locations is likely to cost around
$25m. At the lower end of the spectrum,
small logos placed on the cockpit sides or
These are F1’s aptly-named pay driversand, even if they fall well short of a Vettel
or Fernando Alonso in terms of pure talent,
the money they bring to a team can often
make up for it, since it can be used to pushforward development of the car itself.
Some sponsors don’t even get presence
on the cars and are instead known as
suppliers. This is a cheaper alternative, and
often doesn’t involve a cash cost. Instead, acompany provides equipment or services
and, although they don’t get TV exposure,
usually receives many of the perks which
come with on-car sponsorships – passes
into F1’s exclusive paddock, use of the team
logo in advertising and sometimes evendriver appearances at company functions.
Formula Money ’s data shows that
around 42 percent of team revenue comes
from team-sourced sponsorship, withanother major source being investment
from team-owning companies at
24 percent, but the marketing benefit from
AVE compensates for this investment.
POINTS MEAN PRIZES
The other major source of revenue comes
from the teams’ profit share with F1.
Here’s what it costs to put your logo on
some prime Formula 1 real estate – the
bodywork of a front-running team such as
McLaren for a season (estimates are for
both cars). Source: Formula Money
REAR WING/ENGINE COVER/SIDEPODS (LARGE LOGO)
$25M FOR EACH
REAR WING ENDPLATES (MEDIUM LOGO)
$5MLOWER SIDEPOD (SMALL LOGO)
$1M
The new-for-2014Formula 1 enginescould double thecost of supply fornon-factory teams.
Radical 1.6-liter,turbocharged V6units with advancedenergy recoverysystems will replacethe naturally-aspirated, 2.4-literV8s used since ’06.
A single-season,two-car supply is nowin the region of $13m,but is predicted to hit$25-$30m in 2014.The manufacturerssay costs will falldramatically insubsequent years.
NEW ENGINE
RULES ADD TO
TEAM COSTS
Ferrari’s Fernando Alonso is said to be on an
annual retainer of $40m, a figure comparable
with the highest-earning NFL quarterbacks.
Based on accounts submitted, Red Bull
Racing team principal Christian Horner
is believed to have earned $2m in 2011.
SUPPLY AND DEMAND 1 SUPPLY AND DEMAND 2
nose of the car can generally be purchasedfor less than $3m with a front-running
team. Bearing in mind that these are annual
figures, the total cost of the deal can bemuch greater as partnerships last for
around three years on average.
In the vast majority of cases, a team’s
marketing department secures the
sponsorship, but occasionally it is broughtonboard by a driver. Lower ranking teams
sometimes take drivers purely on the
understanding that companies they have
connections with will provide sponsorship.
G l e n n D u n b a r / L A T
L o r e n z o B e l l a n c a / L A T
S t e v e n T e e / L A T
M d
8/13/2019 F1 Wealth Creation
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/f1-wealth-creation 10/10
77RACER.com
Under the long-in-the-making 2013 version
of the Concorde Agreement – the contract
that binds together the FIA, the teams andthe commercial rights holder, Formula 1
Group – the teams are set to receive a total
of 63 percent of the sport’s annual profitsas prize money (compared with 50 percent
in the previous Concorde Agreement that
lapsed at the end of 2012). Under theprevious Concorde Agreement, that
comprised around 29 percent of total team
revenue and came to the not inconsiderable
sum of $698.5m in 2011, according to
F1’s most recent financial statements.What you receive from the profit share
isn’t just based on your most recent
on-track performances. Taking multi-
season achievements into account, three
teams – Red Bull Racing, Ferrari andMcLaren – receive varying Constructors’
Championship Bonus (CCB) payouts
which add up to whatever is the greater
of 7.5 percent of total profits or $100m.Based on its historic status and the
importance of the Prancing Horse to F1,
Ferrari receives an additional payout. Under
the old agreement that was 2.5 percent,
rising to 5 percent in the latest version.In real terms, winning the constructors’
title in 2012 gave Red Bull Racing an
estimated $87m from the prize money pot.
The remaining 5 percent of F1 team
income comes from miscellaneous sources,
such as the previously mentioned paydrivers, who typically bring $10m each to
drive. The other drivers are paid to drive,
and this averages at $5.2m per driver, rising
to an estimated $40m for Ferrari’s Alonso.
Drivers aside, after manufacturing andR&D, staff salaries are the second biggest
cost for F1 teams, averaging $42.5m per
outfit, thanks to 600-plus staff numbers at
the bigger teams. It’s a huge figure, but it’s
just one more example of how F1 teamsmanage to spend almost every dollar they
receive in the relentless pursuit of victory.
Mercedes’ Formula 1 activities are split
into two: Mercedes Grand Prix (race
operation) and High Performance
Engines (supplying McLaren and Force
India, as well as its own race team) are
separate entities. However, HPEcannot be isolated; nor can MGP’s
engineering satellite operating
from Daimler’s Stuttgart base.
Combined, Mercedes has by far
the largest spend in F1, withcommensurate headcounts. These
are offset (marginally) by the engine
supply contracts with Force India
and McLaren, the latter expiring
after 2014 when it switches to thereturning Honda. Williams will also
join Mercedes’ customer ranks
next season, when the new F1
engine formula come into play.
These activities explain top-heavystructures, with recent intensive
staff recruitment drives pointing to
a ramping up of activities and
corresponding budget increases.
Mercedes GP is financed by a
combination of Daimler funding,sponsorship (the largest being the
Malaysian national petro-chemical
company Petronas), customer activities
and FOM payments. Shareholding was
diluted recently through an allocationto motorsport director Toto Wolff
(30 percent) and non-executive
chairman Niki Lauda (10 percent).
Although a member of F1’s
Strategic Committee, the Mercedes GPoperation is not a full member of the
CCB, qualifying for annual incremental
payouts of £8m until 2015, which
from then on increases to £10m.
MERCEDES GRAND PRIX
CASE STUDY
INCOME BREAKDOWN
33.33%($80M)DAIMLER
40%($96M)
SPONSORS26.67%($64M)FOM EARNINGSFROM 2012
2013 estimated spend and income:
Spend: $256m (inc. engines)Income: $240m
SIDE OF TUB (MEDIUM LOGO)
$10M
TOP OF NOSE (SMALL LOGO)
$3M
WING MIRRORS (SMALL LOGO)
$5M
(LEFT) On average,
around 42 percent of
a Formula 1 outfit’s
budget comes
from team-sourced
sponsorship. (BELOW
LEFT) Ferrari has
been part of the F1
World Championship
since its inception in
1950. Its special
payments from the
sport’s annual profits
reflect that history
and the marque’s
massive fan appeal.
L A T
a r c h i v e
No. 2 / THE TEAMS