Questioning F1's value is a fight too far for FIA's Ben Sulayem: Medland

This week, Ben Sulayem took it upon himself to post some tweets that were actually quite strange when you come to think of it, and could potentially be damaging.

Last week, a Bloomberg report claimed that Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund (PIF) had shown an interest in purchasing F1, valuing the company at “well above $20billion”, but had been rebuffed in the early stages as Liberty Media was not interested in selling.

Given the weekend to think about it, Ben Sulayem then tweeted:

“As the custodians of motorsport, the FIA, as a non-profit organisation, is cautious about alleged inflated price tags of $20bn being put on F1,” he tweeted. “Any potential buyer is advised to apply common sense, consider the greater good of the sport and come with a clear, sustainable plan – not just a lot of money.

“It is our duty to consider what the future impact will be for promoters in terms of increased hosting fees and other commercial costs, and any adverse impact that it could have on fans.”

As the custodians of motorsport, the FIA, as a non-profit organisation, is cautious about alleged inflated price tags of $20bn being put on F1. (1/3)

— Mohammed Ben Sulayem (@Ben_Sulayem) January 23, 2023

Those posts were also retweeted by the FIA’s official Twitter account, reinforcing the image that it was the governing body’s official position rather than just an opinion broadcast by the president himself.

You could look at Ben Sulayem’s tweets as a sensible response to such a valuation, but then there’s so much we all don’t know about F1’s inner workings, company assets and potential that it’s tough to accurately judge. And so too should it be for the FIA president. If it isn’t tough to judge in his position, then that knowledge can’t be used to potentially alter the share price and value of the company…

The FIA and F1 have a 100-year agreement that grants F1 the exclusive right to exploit the commercial rights of the Formula 1 World Championship, with the FIA giving “unequivocal undertakings that it will not do anything to prejudice the ownership, management and/or exploitation of those rights”.

I’m quoting from a letter signed by Sacha Woodward Hill – F1’s Chief Legal Officer – and Renee Wilm, her counterpart at Liberty Media. We’re talking heavy hitters, who were far from impressed with Ben Sulayem’s tweets.

Those tweets, the letter claims, “interfere with our rights in an unacceptable manner”, and so F1 and Liberty warns that “any individual or organisation commenting on the value of a listed entity or its subsidiaries, especially claiming or implying possession of inside knowledge while doing so, risks causing substantial damage to the shareholders and investors of that entity, not to mention potential exposure to serious regulatory consequences.

“To the degree that these comments damage the value of Liberty Media Corporation, the FIA may be liable as a result.”

His comments angered some teams, given talking down the series’ value impacts their worth

This was a proper warning shot across the bows of the FIA, marking a clear change from the previous squabbling. No longer was F1 suggesting it is simply fighting a bit of a PR battle against the president over relatively minor matters – and still working effectively together on others – but now it is trying to rein him back in.

The Andretti example was viewed as Ben Sulayem taking the bait somewhat, responding to discussions or stances behind the scenes and making them public when he needs the teams and F1 to be in agreement with the FIA over any prospective new entrant. Even if the Bloomberg story was similarly planted to try and flush out interest from potential buyers and set an extremely high asking price, this wasn’t something for the president to bite on.

It came as a surprise to those within F1 and the teams, and angered a number given that any talking down of the sport’s value also impacts how much those teams are worth.

The letter’s leaking suggests how annoyed some team personnel were, and perhaps that landed as the FIA took the “decline to comment on this matter” approach once news of its existence broke.

That’s sensible, and while it may allow the situation to be defused if no more comments about it are made in public, it will not be forgotten in a hurry within F1 HQ.

Now the question is how Ben Sulayem actually feels about the situation, and if it has frustrated him that it is now public knowledge that he was hit with such a firm response. So far he has shown that he isn’t usually willing (or able) to let things go and tends to want to fight back. At times that’s the right approach for the FIA president – who certainly has his own interests to defend and needs to keep a tight grip on many aspects of F1 – but this isn’t one of those times.

There’s now a clear example of how unhappy F1 and Liberty are about something Ben Sulayem has done, and it’s likely to be cited in any future disagreements. The rhetoric has certainly gone up a level, and it’s far from a case of happy families as the new season approaches.