Shop
Earlier this month, the European Commission was asked whether it would investigate Liberty Media and Formula 1 as it looks to acquire the commercial rights to MotoGP.
It has now been asked to look into why Andretti Global’s entry for 2026 was refused.
In April, it was announced that a deal had been agreed upon to see Liberty Media take control of MotoGP’s commercial rights holder, Dorna, in a deal worth AUD $6.9 billion.
That transaction has not yet been completed, but if it goes through as planned, Liberty will have the rights to the world’s two leading motorsport categories: F1 and MotoGP.
It also owns a minor stake in IndyCar operation, Meyer Shank Racing.
Meanwhile, the American giant holds a controlling (65 percent) interest in Formula E through sister company Liberty Global.
But while the question asked of the EU Commission then centred on the MotoGP acquisition, new concerns have been raised about F1’s handling of Andretti Global’s effort to join the championship.
In January, F1 announced it had rejected the American operation’s bid, citing a host of reasons related to the commercial impact the squad would have,
It has been criticised for that decision while in the United States the Department of Justice has opened an investigation for potential breaches of antitrust laws.
Now, F1 could face similar pressure in Europe.
Christine Anderson, a German member of the European Parliament, has raised questions surrounding the matter and asked whether the European Commission will investigate.
“The fact that the Formula One Group (FOG) rejected Andretti’s entry into Formula 1, despite the team having FIA approval, could indicate a fundamental conflict of interest,” Anderson noted.
“Existing teams may be forming a de facto cartel that systematically excludes new competitors to protect their revenues and market values.
“This practice could significantly distort competition in the European motor sport industry.
“The case of the Williams team illustrates the issue, as financial difficulties during the COVID-19 crisis meant that the long-established company had to be sold, with the Williams family having to give up all its shares.
“The high team values resulting from market foreclosure make it practically impossible for innovative private entrepreneurs such as Eddie Jordan or Ross Brawn to enter into Formula 1 or take over existing teams.”
She went on to ask three questions of the parliament.
“Given this problematic set-up, what is the Commission’s assessment of the cartel-like structures in Formula 1, which hinder the entry of new teams and lead to a concentration of team owners among large investors,” she asked.
“What measures is the Commission considering to ensure a fairer and more transparent process for the entry of new teams into Formula 1 and a wide range of team owners?
“Is the Commission planning to investigate the impact of these entry barriers and the resulting market concentration on innovation, jobs and the competitiveness of the motor sport and automotive sector in the EU?”
Anderson’s questions are notable as they address a point that has previously been dealt with by the European Commission.
In 2001, it mandated complete separation between the regulatory and commercial elements of Formula 1 following a multi-year investigation.
That was achieved at the time and demonstrated through the collapse of the Prost Grand Prix team (and attempts to resurrect it).
As Speedcafe reported previously, that process has since changed and a two-step process now requires the approval of both the regulator and the commercial rights holder for new entrants.
It is that change which has now been drawn into question in European Parliament.
