Stefano Domenicali outlines Formula 1’s future: “F1 must evolve beyond tactical racing”. Stefano Domenicali outlines his vision for Formula 1’s future.

The contract renewal confirming Stefano Domenicali at the helm of Formula 1 Group for the next five years came almost by acclamation. “The most important aspect for me was receiving total trust from the leadership of Liberty Media. They guaranteed me maximum freedom in setting up the team and system that will be needed to continue this path of growth. Personally, I was also very pleased to feel recognition from within the sport.”

Here is the former team principal’s full interview for Motorsport Italy:

Gathering broad consensus is not something to be taken for granted in Formula 1—quite the opposite, it’s rare. Everything evolves quickly, and just two days after announcing the contract extension with Liberty Media, Domenicali signed the new Concorde Agreement, the commercial platform that defines Formula 1’s financial future.
“The financial aspects are settled; now we need to finalize the governance part, which involves not only the teams but also the FIA. This is another key step for the future because it ensures regulatory stability. One of the things we want to change is to have a more strategic and less tactical approach to the issues affecting our world of Formula 1, so we need the involvement of both the FIA and the teams.”

Let’s stick with strategic decisions. In recent months, there’s been much talk about various engine philosophies Formula 1 could adopt in the medium and long term. What’s your stance on the matter?
“Two years ago, I shared (in an interview with Motorsport.com) what was my strategic vision for the future of Formula 1, and that’s what’s emerging now. In Bahrain, we had a meeting with the FIA and all the current and future engine manufacturers, including GM. I think there were some heavy-handed attempts. Because future discussions were on the table, someone tried to propose an extension of the current regulations. That would have been absolutely wrong. We need to respect those who have invested large sums in a complex and costly project; changing the rules now would have sent the wrong message. If we had called the previous decisions into question (regarding power units), it would have been a huge mistake.”

So, full steam ahead with no second thoughts?
“Nothing stops us from continuing to work to improve the package. The International Federation, along with the manufacturers and teams, can always evaluate whether there are aspects that can be improved. We are on the eve of a historic regulatory change, and personally, I believe it’s very important for the whole system to accept the idea of allowing faster recovery times for a manufacturer if we notice a significant performance gap. I think this is a topic that absolutely must be addressed soon—it’s a situation that could affect anyone.”

That won’t be easy, given the competitive mentality that has always existed in Formula 1…
“I think we all need to think strategically. Having one team dominate for too long is not good for anyone. Our sport is experiencing extraordinary growth and has become a reference on an international level. We should be proud of this, but also very cautious.”

You were there in 2009–10 during the great exodus of more than half the car manufacturers involved in Formula 1. Given the global economy is far from stable today, do you think that scenario could repeat itself?
“It would be wrong not to consider that possibility, especially because the economy is going through a difficult period—Renault left Formula 1 after many years. I want to clarify something: for us, major manufacturers are essential, but we’re big enough to know that if a major crisis hits the sector, large automotive groups could be forced to make difficult decisions.”

“That’s why I believe it’s important for us to consider simplifying things and significantly cutting costs, while also working to maintain a technical link with the development of technologies that are also useful for road mobility—like sustainable fuels, which can complement electric vehicles on the market. These are choices that can help manufacturers stay with us or, in the event of a major crisis that forces brands to suspend racing programs, allow us to react independently and find alternative solutions.”

Simplification is a recurring topic, but it always seems a bit vague. What exactly does it mean?
“Longtime fans—people around my age—need to reconsider their technical views on what creates performance and technological interest. It’s a fundamental topic. The focus on sustainable fuels is absolutely right, but on the other hand—and I say this somewhat provocatively—seeing teams invest huge sums to design and build their own gearboxes no longer makes the sense it once did. The performance delta you can get from that is now basically zero.”

“It’s also a technology that fans have already absorbed, it doesn’t spark curiosity anymore. I think it’s very important to identify the areas where we can talk about technology as entertainment. What was relevant in the past is much less so today and is no longer enough to convince a manufacturer to invest in our sport. We need to face this issue and have the courage to accept that many things have evolved.”

From mid-2024 onward, there’s been a lot of talk about flexible wings, with technical controversies returning.
“I’ve experienced plenty of those firsthand—I remember the case involving us (when I was Ferrari’s sporting director) in Malaysia in 1999, as well as the double diffuser, the ‘frick,’ the mass damper, the F-duct… these stories have always been part of Formula 1. I was practically involved every Sunday in handling regulatory technical and sporting issues. I can say that years ago, there were much wider grey areas than today, but there still remains great intellectual capacity among those working in Formula 1 to push everything to the limit. Personally, I feel today’s technical controversies are really minor compared to the past. In fact, I’d love to see a bit more discussion—they’re the spice of this sport.”

Has the Las Vegas model, which you believed in and invested heavily in, delivered what you expected—or, as some insiders claim, has it not been a great deal?
“It’s a huge success, but as always with new projects, you can’t expect to recoup your investment in a very short time. If we judge the event itself—what Las Vegas has been and is for Formula 1—we’re undoubtedly looking at a success. Beyond the media attention and visibility, it has allowed us to strike commercial deals that would have been much harder without Las Vegas.”

Is it a showcase for the ‘Formula 1 system’?
“Absolutely. And I have no problem confirming that the event’s costs for the Las Vegas community are very high. Starting this year, the Las Vegas Grand Prix is under our direct central management—the working group for the GP now reports directly to us, so we’ve revised the organizational structure to speed up investment recovery. We want to involve local investors more. The economic impact of the Las Vegas weekend has, for two consecutive years, been very significant—even greater than the Super Bowl. We’ve guaranteed major financial benefits to the community. We need to keep investing and believing in it. Let’s not forget that while we’ve made great progress recently in the U.S. market, there’s still huge room for growth. We need to raise awareness even more.”

Is Africa on hold?
“That’s not the right word. Before we move forward in that direction, we need guarantees in three areas. First, the investments must benefit the local community, not just because Formula 1 is there but also for the host country’s economy as a whole. Second, infrastructure: it’s not enough to have a track; we also need hotels, roads, airports, everything. Third, there must be an economic foundation capable of supporting the event in the medium and long term. We’re not on standby—we’re still working to assess what’s missing before we can say, okay, let’s go. But we’re not there yet.”

What has Hamilton’s move to Ferrari brought to Formula 1?
“Seeing it from the perspective of an Italian living abroad, the interest it has generated has been enormous—it’s given Formula 1 great visibility. Then, of course, this is a sport, and interest is also driven by results, and that takes time. Lewis spent many years at Mercedes, developing interpersonal dynamics and technical understanding of the car that may not translate directly to Ferrari. It takes some calm when changing environments entirely. He won the sprint race in China, but all it takes is one less brilliant weekend and opinions shift again. We need to be a bit more cautious. In Japan, a McLaren one-two was taken for granted. In Bahrain, everyone expected a boring race, and in both cases, that didn’t happen—people are too quick to judge.”

Speaking of the Japanese GP, some found it very boring, while others praised the intensity of a race unaffected by tire degradation, where drivers could push from start to finish.
“We’ll never make everyone happy. The Suzuka race was very intense. For fans who also read the timing screens, it was an extraordinary race. But there were no overtakes, and I understand that for many fans, that’s the most exciting part of racing—it’s natural that people want more on-track action. That’s why we pushed for mandatory two-stop strategies in the Monaco GP and asked Pirelli to retain a tire that degrades.”

Is a compromise between degradation and race intensity possible?
“We have two fan bases. Some know everything about the sport, and others are newer and don’t have a deep Formula 1 culture. I think it’s up to us to explain our sport better—it may sound trivial and it’s not easy, but many aspects need to be explained. Of course, on-track action remains the most captivating element.”

Formula 1 has reinvented itself with a new generation of drivers. Do you agree that a highly talented group has emerged?
“Yes. I think we’re witnessing something exceptional. I’m very pleased because it shows the feeder series are working well—it’s great news for our sport. I also think these young drivers should be protected. I thought it was right to give Hadjar an encouraging message in Melbourne, and we’ve seen what he’s capable of. I also think it’s important to support Lawson after his tough season start—we need to humanize these young men.”

“Kimi is doing very well—he’s 18 years old, let’s not forget that—and I’m happy with how Mercedes is supporting and protecting him. It’s nice to see he’s staying grounded, still very much a young man who wants his family by his side for his Formula 1 debut.”

In the end, Formula 1 has welcomed an eleventh team…
“The Cadillac project will help us make an even greater impact on the American market. The discussions we had evolved—the second proposal we received was much stronger than the first. Now it’s up to the project to prove itself, choose two good drivers, and move forward. The arrival of such a major brand will benefit the whole system—for example, it could open the door to additional races in the United States.”

But will the number of Grands Prix always remain 24, or could it increase?
“I confirm—it will stay at a maximum of 24.”