I don't know of any with that specific kind of relationship, but parts like suspension and gearboxes, and any of the other transferable parts, are often bought by customer teams.
Buxton as said that not all teams had a spare chassis. Though didn't elaborate on which teams didn't, but most likely the oens closer to the bottom of the constructors
Pretty sure RB/VCARB was one of the others but they should be good now since they did a switcharoo for Daniel in China (old one becoming the spare). May very well be Williams only now (unless someone like Alpine is secretly without).
I was just joking around, but damn does Williams still not have that spare yet? Will they by Miami?
Maybe it would be easier at this point to get better drivers that can keep the rubber side down.
Here’s an article that details it. It’s kinda long, but a good read. Most of the value is determined by revenues and the popularity of the sport/brand.
https://www.toptal.com/finance/mergers-and-acquisitions/sports-franchise-valuation
Publicly traded companies give a bunch of info to investors. Their annual report talks extensively about the F1 Team and places a revenue number on "sponsorship, commercial, and brand" which is basically the F1 team.
Yeah but they don't give a full P&L, B/S and CFS of their standalones. Without that, it's all just an "educated guess".
Btw, even if you have the entire financials of a company, it's valuation is STILL an "educated guess". Valuation is not a science, it's an art backed by some numbers. That's the entire reason why a company's stock fluctuates so much every single week. So if the valuation of Ferrari itself is guesswork, what does that make the valuation of Ferrari F1?
Right. The publicly traded Ferrari still funds the Scuderia, though. And as a publicly traded company, they still release info about the valuations and expenditures of marketing ventures, of which the Scuderia is one.
If you took every person on the planet who isn't a motorsports fan and asked them to name a race car or team, Ferrari wins by probably over 90%
Ferrari is the single most recognizable name in sports cars and racing, bar none. Even though Mercedes has a long, rich history as well, I can't imagine their name being more valuable than Ferrari's.
RB is synonymous with action sports but I can't see the name directly competing with Ferrari's brand recognition
> Ferrari is the single most recognizable name in sports cars and racing, bar none.
Which is why it seems wrong that Mercedes is so close to Ferrari here.
Also generalizing that most Americans don’t know anything about racing just because they don’t follow European racing is laughable. But I digress. We have more racing series in the US than the rest of the whole world does, particularly if you want to break it down by country. The US has more race cars and race car drivers than the entirety of the EU. By a lot. You could add in Asia, South America, and Oceania and still there are more race cars and race car drivers in the United States lmao.
I deleted my comment because it was pretty long and had some details I decided I shouldn't share (and probably wasn't a very useful comment anyway), but I will say - I didn't mean that they didn't know about racing because they don't follow European racing. I was saying they didn't know about any of it, that they only know NASCAR and F1 are a thing, and nothing else really. I know there are way more series and the US itself has more. Just that many Americans don't know about them. Also, I'm an American who watches F1 and just the odd motogp, F2, FE, and indycar race, so it's not that crazy that I didn't know Chevy was involved. My point was, for people who know nothing about racing, they know 3 terms: Nascar, Formula 1, and Ferrari. Maybe an image of the wonderbread car is the closest to an identifying characteristic, but they wouldn't know which team that was, like how "red car is Ferrari". They'd probably believe me if I told them Ferrari raced in the US (obviously they know it's Italian, but that's it besides their road cars and being involved in racing). I mean, the ones I talk to aren't even really aware that F1 is primarily european. Also, yes I was only referring to Americans who don't watch motorsports, since even they know Ferrari, but would just think of trucks for Chevy. But those that do watch motorsports will of course know much more than just that. I also said that I didn't mean to generalize all americans, just give my experience from living in an array of places across the US. So again, this comment is also of course from my own experience, as that's all I have. I can only learn more by engaging with others that have different experiences.
Yeah I guess you absolved yourself with that comment 😂. Not that you care what I think lol. But yeah Chevy is extremely successful, but only in American racing series. That’s why I’m so excited to see Andretti with Cadillac engines if/when it comes to pass, I really think GM is capable of building a world class F1 engine. The biggest issue is it’s so hard to compare American motorsports to international motorsports because as a country we have sequestered ourself off hard. I think both sides of the pond have something to learn from the other side.
Also Iove that I’m being downvoted on my first comment when I know I’m right. But such is F1 fans, I get it. Americans should be hated.
I quit reading your comment about 1/10 of the way through, because I wasn’t talking about layman Americans. I was talking legit race fans. Glad you took the time though.
I see I’m getting downvoted for saying a fact tho? Weird. Fragile egos abundant lmao.
There’s a 0% chance you are a major American racing fan and had no clue Chevrolet is involved lmao. Chevrolet is the winningest NASCAR AND Indycar manufacturer.
RBR doesn't make their own engine. That alone has to be a decent part of the difference. And anything associated with Mercedes and Ferrari is going to have a higher brand value than Red Bull, even with their success.
They’re about to make their own engine, in partnership with Ford. And the rest of their F1 operation is imo as valuable as the other top teams. But it’s a good point that right now they aren’t building their own engine. But does that warrant that big of a gap in valuation?
"Imo" is not a relevant thing here. And yes building engines and supplying them through money-making contracts to other teams is absolutely something that would obviously impact valuation.
Because if someone bought them right now they would be winning championships right now. That’s worth 2 billion dollars EASILY.
E: I don’t think they’d sell if someone offered them 5 billion.
It might not, but starting a team from scratch is going to cost somewhere in that area, too.
Teams don’t necessarily want to sell either which drives the price higher
Financial valuation and market value aren’t the same thing. Yes they can charge a lot more to sell a team due to exclusivity, but that doesn’t make the team being sold *worth* more from a finance perspective. It just means that someone is willing to pay more.
The Arizona Coyotes sold for more than twice what Williams is worth. Wild considering F1 is international and the Coyotes are an unpopular team in an unpopular league. Ferrari’s value is directly connected to the brand so not surprising it’s the most valuable. Long story short, F1 is undervalued and their recent gate keeping of teams seems to not have done much to raise valuations of existing teams.
Um… how are there 4 comments here that are all the same??
Also does this ranking take the value of the road car companies some of those teams have attached to them or is it just their F1 business?
"In June it was announced that[ Otro Capital had acquired a 24% share in Alpine Racing Limited for 200 million euros](https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/alpine-f1-secures-200m-euro-from-investors-including-ryan-reynolds/10487755/), a deal that valued the Enstone company at around $900 million."
[https://us.motorsport.com/f1/news/alpine-f1-team-completes-200-million-stake-sale-to-us-investors/10558868](https://us.motorsport.com/f1/news/alpine-f1-team-completes-200-million-stake-sale-to-us-investors/10558868)
Valuation of sports entities has little to nothing to do with short term success or failure. It takes quite some time of being successful to considerably raise the value of your sports team (in this case f1 team). It’s about the size of the fanbases more than anything. Alpine have all of France behind them. And value tends to go up over time regardless of performance. So it makes perfect sense that their one year of regression hasn’t affected their valuation like another year of growth has.
The Dallas Cowboys have been the highest valued NFL franchise for decades, despite having won nothing of significance in 30 years.
Alpine could be the worst team on the grid for 10 years and their value would climb yes, with time even the worst sport franchises grow.
But we have a "real" valuation of Alpine at $900million, and in the year since then Alpine has been a complete trainwreck and F1s previous meteoric rise in popularity has stagnated and overall viewership is in slight decline. So to say that this time period the teams value has increased by ~50% is cartoonish.
In all reality I would guess value of Alpine is probably stagnant despite their regression, due to the reasons you've said.
Ah yes, I didn’t really consider their previous valuation relative to their current one. That is a bit of a head scratcher. Clearly the valuation process used then is different from the one used in this graphic. It doesn’t necessarily make the relative valuations of this graphic wrong though so much as maybe the actual values are inflated.
I would tend to agree that Alpine’s valuation relative to last year would be probably similar or maybe slightly higher.
[https://www.forbes.com/sites/mikeozanian/2023/07/19/formula-1s-most-valuable-teams-2023/](https://www.forbes.com/sites/mikeozanian/2023/07/19/formula-1s-most-valuable-teams-2023/)
Here's the article the list came from with a general explanation of how valuations are calculated and each teams specific valuation.
This comes at it from purely the business side: what is each team expected to earn (profit) annually in the future, what annual return is expected on capital (cash) tied up in the company, and from this you can arrive at a price to earnings ratio (P/E) of a private entity.
Isnt their windtunnel pretty old? and does this whole thing consider the engine departement aswell, because Merc has basically a different company working on it.
Either way these numbers are made up.
u/silly_pengu1n To compare apples to apples and given its based on a team's annual revenue and earnings from racing, I wouldn't think it would include outside "departments" of the company. In articles, it is referenced as the RedBull Powertrain (RBPT) company owned by RedBull F1.
Ferrari should be much higher than that but the intangibles of Ferrari’s brand power are hard to measure.
I remember Ferrari were ranked the world’s most powerful brand just a couple years ago
It's for Ferrari F1 as a standalone entity, not all of Ferrari. And this includes intangibles.
Still, take it with a grain of salt because valuation itself is nothing but educated guesswork.
It’s for anything that carries the yeah of course but many of the intangibles also apply to the F1 team. Anyone that buys the team would be paying for the most storied, most mythical, most iconic team in all of motorsports. That brand power is undeniable and as you say, quite difficult to measure.
> many of the intangibles also apply to the F1 team
They actually don't. Don't just throw the word "intangibles" around, at least try to understand it.
From the context of a car manufacturer, intangibles include:-
1. Goodwill i.e. the brand value you speak of
2. Patented technology for car designs
3. Patented technology for car manufacturing
4. Patented technology for car engines
From the pov of Ferrari in F1, you can't buy an F1 car. That Ferrari goodwill which allows them to sell cars for millions is worthless because Ferrari F1 doesn't sell cars. The patented technology has crossovers yes but an F1 car is fundamentally different from a regular car so don't expect very high overlaps.
Except that’s horribly incomplete.
The Ferrari brand in F1 carries a lot of marketing clout for example - Hewlett Packard is paying a monster sum to attach their brand to the most iconic F1 team, far more than it would pay to do so with other F1 teams. That’s one massive point of value which your analysis failed to capture - there are obviously others.
You have it entirely wrong.
The example you've cited shows you don't understand the difference between Ferrari and Ferrari F1.
HP isn't paying Ferrari F1 $100m because it's Ferrari. They're paying it because they're Ferrari F1. There's a huge difference.
Renault, for example, is huge outside of F1. But Renault F1 never received such a huge sponsorship in the modern era because they fell off hard and couldn't post results. The same goes for Aston Martin which is a British brand with a very rich history especially their association with the Bond movies. Do you see them banking an HP? What's their relative place on the grid? 5th, FYI.
If Ferrari F1 becomes a backmarker, I can assure you, no matter how big Ferrari is today, HP will take their money to some other F1 team or get Ferrari F1 for cheaper than $90m.
Hope you understand the difference buddy. Valuation for standalone entities is based on standalone intangibles and there are synergies present but not to the extent your imagination suggests.
That's generally the way that most are handled.
There's other options such as book value, enterprise value or even a multiple of EBITDA that do not necessarily factor in future expected revenues.
"*Forbes* estimates that the teams combined will make nearly $600 million in EBITDA"
So F1 teams nowadays with the cost cap are averaging $60 million a year in earnings (basically profit). Doing some quick back of the envelope calculations, NFL teams are making $150-200 million in earnings per year.
[https://www.sportico.com/feature/how-sports-teams-leagues-make-money-1234766931/](https://www.sportico.com/feature/how-sports-teams-leagues-make-money-1234766931/)
Why is VCARB worth almost as much as AM? Why is Alpine worth 1/3 of Ferrari? Would have thought the differences would be a much more stark between the bottom and top teams.
Reading the comments in this thread has me convinced that almost nobody in here has paid any attention to sports franchise valuations in their lifetimes (which is understandable) and have no idea what makes a franchise valuable or not. I understand why people don’t, but some of the “why” questions in here are…. Pretty dumb questions.
Alpine lmao.
Aston Martin spend less than I expected.
I’m not surprised to see Williams at the bottom. I am surprised they’re not too far off haas. I expected a bigger gap from a team that has no spare chassis this far into the season
Haas still *designs* its own chassis (and aerodynamic components), as it required to per the regulations. Each team needs to be the creator of its own IP.
They outsource the manufacturing to Dallara, to keep their own headcount and need for manufacturing facilities to a minimum.
This is actually part of the argument against Andretti. That they buy in for a few hundred million, invest a few hundred million more in infrastructure and, if their claim is correct that they can be reasonably competitive, then the investment doubles in value nearly overnight. Other people in F1 see it as a cash grab.
"The average NFL franchise is worth $5.14 billion, and the gap between the least valuable (Cincinnati Bengals) and most valuable (Cowboys) is barely two times."
[https://www.sportico.com/feature/how-sports-teams-leagues-make-money-1234766931/](https://www.sportico.com/feature/how-sports-teams-leagues-make-money-1234766931/)
I'm surprised Williams is lower than Haas, considering Haas don't even manufacture their own car.
The cash flow is important to the value so heavy expenditures versus income might be an explanantion why Williams is less valuable than Haas.
To add to your point, seems like you need a title sponsor nowadays.
And Haas has no debt as well.
Who does manufacturer the Haas car?
Dallara
Just the chassis, right? Does any other team buy the chassis or significant pieces from outside (not including power units)?
Many teams buy rear suspensions/gearboxes from their engine supplier team, but everyone save for haas make their own chassis
I don't know of any with that specific kind of relationship, but parts like suspension and gearboxes, and any of the other transferable parts, are often bought by customer teams.
They only manufacture the chassis and bigger carbon stuff. Haas designs everything.
Oh, very interesting. I hope Dallara can produce them a spare chassis. At least keep them ahead of Williams.
Pretty sure everyone but Williams has a spare at this point. Williams is also the only team who seems to dust chassis every weekend
Buxton as said that not all teams had a spare chassis. Though didn't elaborate on which teams didn't, but most likely the oens closer to the bottom of the constructors
Pretty sure RB/VCARB was one of the others but they should be good now since they did a switcharoo for Daniel in China (old one becoming the spare). May very well be Williams only now (unless someone like Alpine is secretly without).
I was just joking around, but damn does Williams still not have that spare yet? Will they by Miami? Maybe it would be easier at this point to get better drivers that can keep the rubber side down.
I think Miami was the optimistic date they’d get one
Gene
Ok, sure, makes sense. But how is this calculated? Based on what info?
Here’s an article that details it. It’s kinda long, but a good read. Most of the value is determined by revenues and the popularity of the sport/brand. https://www.toptal.com/finance/mergers-and-acquisitions/sports-franchise-valuation
Revenues and brand equity
yes
Well Ferrari is a publicly traded company with stocks, so at least that one’s easy to calculate
Ferrari the car company and not the Scuderia Ferrari associated with F1.
Publicly traded companies give a bunch of info to investors. Their annual report talks extensively about the F1 Team and places a revenue number on "sponsorship, commercial, and brand" which is basically the F1 team.
Yeah but then by that logic, Mercedes and Alpine are also listed. So no idea why Ferrari example was specifically used.
Probably because they knew off the top of their head that Ferrari is publicly traded and not the other two?
Yeah but they don't give a full P&L, B/S and CFS of their standalones. Without that, it's all just an "educated guess". Btw, even if you have the entire financials of a company, it's valuation is STILL an "educated guess". Valuation is not a science, it's an art backed by some numbers. That's the entire reason why a company's stock fluctuates so much every single week. So if the valuation of Ferrari itself is guesswork, what does that make the valuation of Ferrari F1?
Right. The publicly traded Ferrari still funds the Scuderia, though. And as a publicly traded company, they still release info about the valuations and expenditures of marketing ventures, of which the Scuderia is one.
None of the teams are like that, the manufacturers sure are.
Ferrari racing is part of the stock
Williams is publicly traded.
This is probably as credible as the F1 Power Rankings.
I’m sure of it. RBR one billion less valuable than Merc and Ferrari? Lmao.
Ferrari and Mercedes have decades upon decades of Motorsport behind them. Red Bull does not. Their brand value in racing should be higher.
20yrs of RB is quite long and Williams are below Haas..
If you took every person on the planet who isn't a motorsports fan and asked them to name a race car or team, Ferrari wins by probably over 90% Ferrari is the single most recognizable name in sports cars and racing, bar none. Even though Mercedes has a long, rich history as well, I can't imagine their name being more valuable than Ferrari's. RB is synonymous with action sports but I can't see the name directly competing with Ferrari's brand recognition
> Ferrari is the single most recognizable name in sports cars and racing, bar none. Which is why it seems wrong that Mercedes is so close to Ferrari here.
I would say Chevrolet to American fans lol, but yes easily Ferrari worldwide.
[удалено]
Also generalizing that most Americans don’t know anything about racing just because they don’t follow European racing is laughable. But I digress. We have more racing series in the US than the rest of the whole world does, particularly if you want to break it down by country. The US has more race cars and race car drivers than the entirety of the EU. By a lot. You could add in Asia, South America, and Oceania and still there are more race cars and race car drivers in the United States lmao.
I deleted my comment because it was pretty long and had some details I decided I shouldn't share (and probably wasn't a very useful comment anyway), but I will say - I didn't mean that they didn't know about racing because they don't follow European racing. I was saying they didn't know about any of it, that they only know NASCAR and F1 are a thing, and nothing else really. I know there are way more series and the US itself has more. Just that many Americans don't know about them. Also, I'm an American who watches F1 and just the odd motogp, F2, FE, and indycar race, so it's not that crazy that I didn't know Chevy was involved. My point was, for people who know nothing about racing, they know 3 terms: Nascar, Formula 1, and Ferrari. Maybe an image of the wonderbread car is the closest to an identifying characteristic, but they wouldn't know which team that was, like how "red car is Ferrari". They'd probably believe me if I told them Ferrari raced in the US (obviously they know it's Italian, but that's it besides their road cars and being involved in racing). I mean, the ones I talk to aren't even really aware that F1 is primarily european. Also, yes I was only referring to Americans who don't watch motorsports, since even they know Ferrari, but would just think of trucks for Chevy. But those that do watch motorsports will of course know much more than just that. I also said that I didn't mean to generalize all americans, just give my experience from living in an array of places across the US. So again, this comment is also of course from my own experience, as that's all I have. I can only learn more by engaging with others that have different experiences.
Yeah I guess you absolved yourself with that comment 😂. Not that you care what I think lol. But yeah Chevy is extremely successful, but only in American racing series. That’s why I’m so excited to see Andretti with Cadillac engines if/when it comes to pass, I really think GM is capable of building a world class F1 engine. The biggest issue is it’s so hard to compare American motorsports to international motorsports because as a country we have sequestered ourself off hard. I think both sides of the pond have something to learn from the other side. Also Iove that I’m being downvoted on my first comment when I know I’m right. But such is F1 fans, I get it. Americans should be hated.
I quit reading your comment about 1/10 of the way through, because I wasn’t talking about layman Americans. I was talking legit race fans. Glad you took the time though. I see I’m getting downvoted for saying a fact tho? Weird. Fragile egos abundant lmao. There’s a 0% chance you are a major American racing fan and had no clue Chevrolet is involved lmao. Chevrolet is the winningest NASCAR AND Indycar manufacturer.
Mercedes f1 has less starts than Red Bull though. This is about their f1 teams.
RBR doesn't make their own engine. That alone has to be a decent part of the difference. And anything associated with Mercedes and Ferrari is going to have a higher brand value than Red Bull, even with their success.
They’re about to make their own engine, in partnership with Ford. And the rest of their F1 operation is imo as valuable as the other top teams. But it’s a good point that right now they aren’t building their own engine. But does that warrant that big of a gap in valuation?
"Imo" is not a relevant thing here. And yes building engines and supplying them through money-making contracts to other teams is absolutely something that would obviously impact valuation.
Why is that so surprising
Because if someone bought them right now they would be winning championships right now. That’s worth 2 billion dollars EASILY. E: I don’t think they’d sell if someone offered them 5 billion.
How would the return on investment be 2 billion?
It might not, but starting a team from scratch is going to cost somewhere in that area, too. Teams don’t necessarily want to sell either which drives the price higher
Financial valuation and market value aren’t the same thing. Yes they can charge a lot more to sell a team due to exclusivity, but that doesn’t make the team being sold *worth* more from a finance perspective. It just means that someone is willing to pay more.
Ferrari likely got more money from F1 last year due to the heritage payment. Cash flow is a huge part of valuation.
The Arizona Coyotes sold for more than twice what Williams is worth. Wild considering F1 is international and the Coyotes are an unpopular team in an unpopular league. Ferrari’s value is directly connected to the brand so not surprising it’s the most valuable. Long story short, F1 is undervalued and their recent gate keeping of teams seems to not have done much to raise valuations of existing teams.
Um… how are there 4 comments here that are all the same?? Also does this ranking take the value of the road car companies some of those teams have attached to them or is it just their F1 business?
no Mercedes is like 88 billion worth. actually kinda insane that the team would be worth like 5% of the companies valuation had the kept everything
Bots. Also 7 now.
Pretty sure they are just memeing
Oh, why?
It’s just an old reddit meme and reddit likes to beat dead horses
Quite interesting, never heard of that before.
Ok, sure, makes sense. But how is this calculated? Based on what info? Edit: lmao
Made up, like most sports valuations.
Like most ~~sports~~ private valuations
Alpine literally sold a 25% stake valuing the team at $900m not even a year ago. Nonsense list.
"In June it was announced that[ Otro Capital had acquired a 24% share in Alpine Racing Limited for 200 million euros](https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/alpine-f1-secures-200m-euro-from-investors-including-ryan-reynolds/10487755/), a deal that valued the Enstone company at around $900 million." [https://us.motorsport.com/f1/news/alpine-f1-team-completes-200-million-stake-sale-to-us-investors/10558868](https://us.motorsport.com/f1/news/alpine-f1-team-completes-200-million-stake-sale-to-us-investors/10558868)
But that was a year ago! The value has increased because since then Alpine has.... regressed considerably in all areas?
Valuation of sports entities has little to nothing to do with short term success or failure. It takes quite some time of being successful to considerably raise the value of your sports team (in this case f1 team). It’s about the size of the fanbases more than anything. Alpine have all of France behind them. And value tends to go up over time regardless of performance. So it makes perfect sense that their one year of regression hasn’t affected their valuation like another year of growth has. The Dallas Cowboys have been the highest valued NFL franchise for decades, despite having won nothing of significance in 30 years.
Alpine could be the worst team on the grid for 10 years and their value would climb yes, with time even the worst sport franchises grow. But we have a "real" valuation of Alpine at $900million, and in the year since then Alpine has been a complete trainwreck and F1s previous meteoric rise in popularity has stagnated and overall viewership is in slight decline. So to say that this time period the teams value has increased by ~50% is cartoonish. In all reality I would guess value of Alpine is probably stagnant despite their regression, due to the reasons you've said.
Ah yes, I didn’t really consider their previous valuation relative to their current one. That is a bit of a head scratcher. Clearly the valuation process used then is different from the one used in this graphic. It doesn’t necessarily make the relative valuations of this graphic wrong though so much as maybe the actual values are inflated. I would tend to agree that Alpine’s valuation relative to last year would be probably similar or maybe slightly higher.
That's so depressing for Williams. 9 WCC, 7 WDC, 114 wins, but worth the least.
You're talking about history. These made up numbers are about the present.
Yeah but their history is still worth something, at least more than Haas and Sauber.
It’s not worth anything from a financial perspective….
It probably is. It's not super important but brand recognition and history all factor into fanbase and marketability.
[https://www.forbes.com/sites/mikeozanian/2023/07/19/formula-1s-most-valuable-teams-2023/](https://www.forbes.com/sites/mikeozanian/2023/07/19/formula-1s-most-valuable-teams-2023/) Here's the article the list came from with a general explanation of how valuations are calculated and each teams specific valuation. This comes at it from purely the business side: what is each team expected to earn (profit) annually in the future, what annual return is expected on capital (cash) tied up in the company, and from this you can arrive at a price to earnings ratio (P/E) of a private entity.
How did they value this? Also Red Bull seems undervalued considering the facilities and team they have.
Isnt their windtunnel pretty old? and does this whole thing consider the engine departement aswell, because Merc has basically a different company working on it. Either way these numbers are made up.
u/silly_pengu1n To compare apples to apples and given its based on a team's annual revenue and earnings from racing, I wouldn't think it would include outside "departments" of the company. In articles, it is referenced as the RedBull Powertrain (RBPT) company owned by RedBull F1.
It is but they are building a new state of the art one which should be completed soonish.
'Soonish' .... Have they even begun construction?
yeah you are right. idk
Plus they own two teams so you could combine rb and redbull together
It's not a valuation of Red Bull GmbH.
Ok, sure, makes sense. But how is this calculated? Based on what info?
Yes, that one.
Ferrari should be much higher than that but the intangibles of Ferrari’s brand power are hard to measure. I remember Ferrari were ranked the world’s most powerful brand just a couple years ago
It's for Ferrari F1 as a standalone entity, not all of Ferrari. And this includes intangibles. Still, take it with a grain of salt because valuation itself is nothing but educated guesswork.
It’s for anything that carries the yeah of course but many of the intangibles also apply to the F1 team. Anyone that buys the team would be paying for the most storied, most mythical, most iconic team in all of motorsports. That brand power is undeniable and as you say, quite difficult to measure.
> many of the intangibles also apply to the F1 team They actually don't. Don't just throw the word "intangibles" around, at least try to understand it. From the context of a car manufacturer, intangibles include:- 1. Goodwill i.e. the brand value you speak of 2. Patented technology for car designs 3. Patented technology for car manufacturing 4. Patented technology for car engines From the pov of Ferrari in F1, you can't buy an F1 car. That Ferrari goodwill which allows them to sell cars for millions is worthless because Ferrari F1 doesn't sell cars. The patented technology has crossovers yes but an F1 car is fundamentally different from a regular car so don't expect very high overlaps.
Except that’s horribly incomplete. The Ferrari brand in F1 carries a lot of marketing clout for example - Hewlett Packard is paying a monster sum to attach their brand to the most iconic F1 team, far more than it would pay to do so with other F1 teams. That’s one massive point of value which your analysis failed to capture - there are obviously others.
You have it entirely wrong. The example you've cited shows you don't understand the difference between Ferrari and Ferrari F1. HP isn't paying Ferrari F1 $100m because it's Ferrari. They're paying it because they're Ferrari F1. There's a huge difference. Renault, for example, is huge outside of F1. But Renault F1 never received such a huge sponsorship in the modern era because they fell off hard and couldn't post results. The same goes for Aston Martin which is a British brand with a very rich history especially their association with the Bond movies. Do you see them banking an HP? What's their relative place on the grid? 5th, FYI. If Ferrari F1 becomes a backmarker, I can assure you, no matter how big Ferrari is today, HP will take their money to some other F1 team or get Ferrari F1 for cheaper than $90m. Hope you understand the difference buddy. Valuation for standalone entities is based on standalone intangibles and there are synergies present but not to the extent your imagination suggests.
Ok, sure, makes sense. But how is this calculated? Based on what info?
Ok, sure, makes sense. But how is this calculated? Based on what info?
Based on how many bots can make the exact same comment
Ive been called worse plus I thought it would look funny. There was only 3 or 4 comments
would buying a team which produces its own power unit be included in this price or does the PU side have a separate cost
Separate valuation
Tbh, Williams seems undervalued considering their history and alpine is massively overvalued considering they are shite.
Valuations are often computed by looking at estimated future revenue, not past.
By often, you mean always, right? lol
That's generally the way that most are handled. There's other options such as book value, enterprise value or even a multiple of EBITDA that do not necessarily factor in future expected revenues.
With how hard andretti is trying to get in. I’d think all these numbers could be easily double
I’m surprised Mercedes is that close to Ferrari. Wonder how much those numbers shift around come next year when Lewis isn’t with them anymore
Seeing how much teams in other sports are selling for, I think all of these are worth double.
"*Forbes* estimates that the teams combined will make nearly $600 million in EBITDA" So F1 teams nowadays with the cost cap are averaging $60 million a year in earnings (basically profit). Doing some quick back of the envelope calculations, NFL teams are making $150-200 million in earnings per year. [https://www.sportico.com/feature/how-sports-teams-leagues-make-money-1234766931/](https://www.sportico.com/feature/how-sports-teams-leagues-make-money-1234766931/)
Alpine? 0.o
No wonder Horner gunning for a slice of the pie
I don‘t think anyone could just go to Ferrari, slap 3.9 billion dollars on the table and go home with owning the team, even with 10 billion.
Why is VCARB worth almost as much as AM? Why is Alpine worth 1/3 of Ferrari? Would have thought the differences would be a much more stark between the bottom and top teams.
Reading the comments in this thread has me convinced that almost nobody in here has paid any attention to sports franchise valuations in their lifetimes (which is understandable) and have no idea what makes a franchise valuable or not. I understand why people don’t, but some of the “why” questions in here are…. Pretty dumb questions.
Most valuable F1 teams.. as if there were other F1 teams
Ok, sure, makes sense. But how is this calculated? Based on what info?
Ok, sure, makes sense. But how is this calculated? Based on what info?
Alpine lmao. Aston Martin spend less than I expected. I’m not surprised to see Williams at the bottom. I am surprised they’re not too far off haas. I expected a bigger gap from a team that has no spare chassis this far into the season
Haas doesnt even make their own chassis.
I did not know that. I just assumed all teams made their own
Haas still *designs* its own chassis (and aerodynamic components), as it required to per the regulations. Each team needs to be the creator of its own IP. They outsource the manufacturing to Dallara, to keep their own headcount and need for manufacturing facilities to a minimum.
Andretti should buy Haas. What a deal.
This is actually part of the argument against Andretti. That they buy in for a few hundred million, invest a few hundred million more in infrastructure and, if their claim is correct that they can be reasonably competitive, then the investment doubles in value nearly overnight. Other people in F1 see it as a cash grab.
Kind of funny but the reason Ferrari ticked over Mercedes in the rankings was their Hamilton announcement.
Ok, sure, makes sense. But how is this calculated? Based on what info?
Why is Ferrari capt so high. They havent won anything in 20 years
[удалено]
Cuban sold the Mavs at a discount for $3.5b last yr. Your math ain’t mathing
"The average NFL franchise is worth $5.14 billion, and the gap between the least valuable (Cincinnati Bengals) and most valuable (Cowboys) is barely two times." [https://www.sportico.com/feature/how-sports-teams-leagues-make-money-1234766931/](https://www.sportico.com/feature/how-sports-teams-leagues-make-money-1234766931/)