Christian Horner locked in £50m Red Bull settlement talks
The 51-year-old was ' released from his operational duties ' after 20 years at the helm of the Milton Keynes-based team, although he remains an employee for the time being while lawyers thrash out the terms of his settlement.
Horner's contract is believed to run for another five-and-a-half years, until the end of 2030. The latest accounts for Red Bull Technology Ltd show the remuneration for its highest-paid director, understood to be Horner, rose from £8.04 million in 2022 to £8.92 million in 2023. That was an 11 per cent rise and cemented his status as the highest-paid team principal on the grid. But it is a salary that is almost certain to have risen again since then, with the team having won the drivers' title in 2024.
During Horner's time in charge, Red Bull have won eight drivers' world championships, six constructors' titles and 124 races, and in 2023 the team came within one race of winning every grand prix in a single season.
If his lawyers push for his contract to be paid up in full, they could be looking at anywhere up to £60 million. And there may be other income streams or bonuses which would have been paid had Horner remained in position.
Horner was responsible for bringing in many of the team's partnerships across both Red Bull and sister team Racing Bulls.
Red Bull's lawyers will push back, arguing he is likely to find work in the interim. Horner will almost certainly be in demand from teams given his track record. Although he was damaged by the 'sexting' scandal that erupted last year, he has been cleared by two investigations after he was accused by a female employee of coercive behaviour, which he has always denied.
Where could Horner return?
You could make a case for any number of teams to approach him. From Alpine, who are run by Flavio Briatore, with whom Horner enjoys a good relationship, to Aston Martin, whose owner Lawrence Stroll is fiercely ambitious and desperate to put his team at the front of the grid, to Ferrari, who have been linked with Horner in the past and whose current team principal Fred Vasseur is the subject of fierce scrutiny in Italy.
He is unlikely to be able to speak to any of them for a long while, pending the terms of his settlement, the value of which is yet to be determined.
No reason was given by Red Bull for his sacking on Wednesday, but it appears Horner lost out in a power struggle with Red Bull's parent company in Austria, who want more control of the team, as well as with Jos Verstappen, the father of his star driver, the four-time world champion Max.
Faced with the prospect of losing Verstappen to a rival, and with the team currently enduring a leaner spell on track and a poisonous atmosphere off it, Red Bull's overlords acted.
Despite last year's two investigations, there is no suggestion that Horner lost his job on misconduct grounds, which could affect any settlement figure. The team have been fulsome in their praise of Horner on social media, while Oliver Mintzlaff, a CEO at Red Bull GmbH, also released a glowing statement in the wake of Wednesday's bombshell.
'We would like to thank Christian Horner for his exceptional work over the last 20 years,' Mintzlaff said. 'With his tireless commitment, experience, expertise and innovative thinking, he has been instrumental in establishing Red Bull Racing as one of the most successful and attractive teams in Formula One. Thank you for everything, Christian, and you will forever remain an important part of our team history.'
On Thursday, Dr Helmut Marko, Red Bull's motorsport advisor, and another man with whom Horner has had a strained relationship over the last 18 months, released his own statement.
'Christian and I have worked together very successfully for over 20 years – both in Formula One and in Formula 3000,' Marko said. 'I would like to sincerely thank Christian for that. During this time, we were able to celebrate an incredible number of outstanding achievements. We helped develop two world drivers' champions and several grand prix winners. That has always been – and still is – the Red Bull way.
'As for the current sporting situation: there are still 12 races to go, and we will continue to fight for the drivers' championship as long as it's mathematically possible.'
Horner's replacement, Laurent Mekies, met with Red Bull mechanics on Thursday during a filming day at Silverstone that the team had already scheduled before the sudden exit of their former team principal.
Mekies, who has assumed the role of CEO and team principal of Red Bull Racing, hailed the success of the team and stressed that they would all have a role to play in getting back to the front of the grid. It followed an address from Mintzlaff who was also at Silverstone.
'I look at this team as most outside look at them, we see the very best people in the world at what they do,' Mekies said. 'That's what this team is, even from being a competitor previously you look at Red Bull Racing as being the sharpest team, having managed to accumulate the best talent to work together.
'It is a privilege to join the team and the focus will be on making sure all the talented people here have what they need to perform at their best, because they are already the very best. We will be focusing on that and making sure the Red Bull energy is flowing through the team. We are not underestimating the challenge ahead, we will need everybody and we will go about it together and I am sure with everyone's contributions we will tackle this challenge.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
20 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Tread carefully with reform of bank ringfencing, chancellor
Rachel Reeves called it 'the biggest set of reforms to financial regulation in a decade', and, in one narrow sense, her Leeds Reforms would qualify for the description. If the ringfencing regime for banks were to be scrapped, we really would be entering a new era – or going back to an old one, since the separation of banks' retail and investment banking activities was the single biggest regulatory change introduced after the 2008-09 crash to try to prevent another blow-up. Reeves on Tuesday, however, merely announced a review to look at how reforms to ringfencing could 'strike the right balance between growth and stability, including protecting consumer deposits'. One hopes that does not mean outright abolition, which is what banks such as HSBC, Lloyds and NatWest have been urging on the grounds that the rules trap capital and impede growth. The stout defence of ringfencing from Andrew Bailey, governor of the Bank of England, has always felt more compelling: the regime has made banks safer and removal would increase the cost of loans and mortgages. It would surely be hard for a chancellor to override the Bank on this core question, especially when Barclays – which, in theory, might have most to gain from abolition as it has the largest investment bank – is also in the defence camp. A fudged outcome would see more activities allowed within the ringfenced entity. It is technical stuff, but also deeply important. Get it wrong and the cautious voices sounding the alarm over a government in search of a sugar-rush of growth via financial deregulation would have a point. Tread carefully, chancellor: ditching ringfencing in its entirety risks unlearning the lessons of the last crisis. In other respects, however, Reeves's red tape-slashing, investment-boosting, obstacle-removing reforms can be criticised in the other direction: yes, some changes are sensible tidying-up exercises but others are underwhelming. Take the showbiz headliner: the advertising campaign to encourage over-cautious savers to push a few quid into the stock market. The goal is admirable in itself for the reasons the Treasury gives: savers are doing themselves long-term financial harm if they do not understand that shares beat cash over most long-term periods. • Looser mortgage rules, which allow lenders to provide bigger mortgages worth more than 4.5 times borrowers' annual income. The move could help another 36,000 first-time buyers per year, according to the Bank of England • A permanent government-backed mortgage guarantee scheme, in which taxpayers will pick up the bill when a borrower defaults, in an effort to encourage participating banks to offer more 91-95% mortgages • A government-backed but industry-funded advertising campaign to encourage consumers to invest their cash savings in shares • Plans to allow banks to send information about 'investment opportunities' to savers that have cash sitting in low interest rate accounts, encouraging them to shift money to stocks and shares • A fresh review of ringfencing rules which were introduced after the 2008 financial crisis in order to protect consumer cash from a bank's riskier activities • A review of warnings attached to investment products to ensure that people are 'accurately' judging risk levels • Plans to 'radically streamline' accountability rules for senior bankers and finance bosses • Reining in the powers of the Financial Ombudsman Service, which settles complaints between consumers and businesses • Cutting the rate of interest – and therefore total compensation – paid out to consumers wronged by City firms and imposing a 10-year limit for claims • A new 'concierge service' to court international investors and create a one-stop-shop to promote the UK and provide tailored support to help businesses plan where to invest. But it's not as if the Treasury itself is doing much more than cheering from the wings. The ad campaign will be funded by the industry, which presumably could have launched the thing itself without government endorsement. At the very least, Reeves could have given the volunteers a hand by abolishing stamp duty on shares for purchases within ISAs. Even that gentle step was conspicuous by its absence. Tweaking risk-warning messaging may help at the margins. So will better access for retail investors to corporate debt and corporate fund-raising, as announced by the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA). But if Reeves is truly alarmed (as she should be) by the statistic that the UK has the lowest level of retail investment in the G7 group of rich economies, bolder measures are needed. It could take a generation to change saving habits to encourage 'informed risk-taking' but the crisis in the London stock market is happening now. Stamp duty remains the drag in the background, and is the real test of the Treasury's seriousness. Elsewhere, several reforms look justified: help for 'challenger' banks on capital rules; some loosening of rules to help first-time buyers; a trimming of the size of the authorisation regime for bank senior managers in the interest of efficiency; changes to allow the London Stock Exchange to quote dollar- and euro-denominated shares. Sign up to Business Today Get set for the working day – we'll point you to all the business news and analysis you need every morning after newsletter promotion A third pot of policies are straightforward lobbying victories for the City. That lot includes the neutering of the financial ombudsman service, but the banks may have had a point about the body acting as a 'quasi regulator' within the FCA. The timing of the reform looks terrible while the unresolved car finance affair rumbles on, but the regulatory setup did look basically confused. The onus now falls on the FCA to act sooner to spot looming scandals, which is not a wholly reassuring thought. But let's not overstate the significance of the Mansion House speech. Yes, the financial services industry deserves its place as one of the eight growth-driving sectors within the government's overall industry strategy; it's too big to ignore. But, despite some of the rhetoric, it's not as if the City is currently being strangled by regulation in the way that purer industrial sectors are being hampered by high energy costs. So don't go overboard on ringfencing reform: it is the bit that matters the most.
Reuters
20 minutes ago
- Reuters
Britain's Moore handed four-year ban after CAS upholds ITIA appeal
July 15 (Reuters) - Britain's Tara Moore, who was previously cleared of an anti-doping rule violation, was handed a four-year ban on Tuesday after the Court of Arbitration for Sport upheld an appeal filed by the International Tennis Integrity Agency. Moore, Britain's former number one-ranked doubles player, was provisionally suspended in June 2022 due to the presence of prohibited anabolic steroids Nandrolone and boldenone. Moore said she had never knowingly taken a banned substance in her career and an independent tribunal determined that contaminated meat consumed by her in the days before sample collection was the source of the prohibited substance. Moore lost 19 months in the process before she was cleared of the ADRV but CAS upheld the ITIA's appeal against the first instance "No Fault or Negligence" ruling with respect to nandrolone. "After reviewing the scientific and legal evidence, the majority of the CAS Panel considered that the player did not succeed in proving that the concentration of nandrolone in her sample was consistent with the ingestion of contaminated meat," CAS said in a statement. "The panel concluded that Ms Moore failed to establish that the ADRV was not intentional. The appeal by the ITIA is therefore upheld and the decision rendered by the Independent Tribunal is set aside." Moore had previously said how she saw her reputation, ranking and livelihood "slowly trickling away" for 19 months during her initial suspension. The 32-year-old had also filed a cross-appeal at CAS "seeking to dismiss the ITIA appeal, dismiss the nandrolone result in the ADRV or alternatively confirm that she bears no fault or negligence". However, CAS said the cross-appeal was declared inadmissible and her four-year period of ineligibility would start from July 15, with credit for any provisional suspension that has already been served. "Our bar for appealing a first instance decision is high, and the decision is not taken lightly," ITIA CEO Karen Moorhouse said in a statement. "In this case, our independent scientific advice was that the player did not adequately explain the high level of nandrolone present in their sample. Today's ruling is consistent with this position."
Daily Mail
27 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
STILL a turn off! Fewer than one in eight watched BBC Scotland...despite it costing £200m
Fewer than one in eight adults watched the BBC Scotland digital channel each week last year - despite it having cost licence-payers more than £200million since its launch. The channel reached only 13 per cent of the population, the same figure as the previous year, and was watched for only an hour and 33 minutes a week by the average viewer. According to the latest BBC annual accounts for 2024/25, the cost of the channel, paid for by the licence fee, rose from £40million a year to £42million in the past year - and the cost per 'user hour' for the BBC Scotland channel and BBC Scotland content on iPlayer was 45p. Earlier this year, BBC Scotland's flagship news show Reporting Scotland: News at Seven was launched on the digital channel, replacing The Nine, which was axed after a row over low viewer numbers and too many repeats, with the new show attracting fewer than 30,000 viewers for its first episode. Last night Scottish Tory culture spokesman Murdo Fraser said: 'BBC Scotland bosses must address why Scots are not getting value for money when it comes to this channel. 'Given the sums involved they must ensure that they are investing in high-quality content that resonates with and reaches a far wider audience in Scotland.' News at Seven, a 30-minute show airing every weeknight on the BBC Scotland channel, aims to complement Reporting Scotland, the BBC One news programme which is screened at 6.30pm. It is presented by Laura Maciver and Amy Irons, who take turns fronting the show. The total cost of the BBC Scotland channel since its launch in 2019 is £204million. The Nine - which at one point reached just 1,700 people - ended last year along with entertainment news programme The Edit and weekly news review Seven Days. Last year media commentator and former BBC editor Professor Tim Luckhurst said: 'The number paying the licence fee has declined and the BBC faces financial challenges that can only be met by making staff redundant. 'For BBC Scotland to spend millions of pounds on a channel that attracts a tiny minority of the population in these circumstances is unreasonable. 'The BBC Scotland channel should close immediately - it costs money the BBC cannot afford.' The BBC was contacted for comment on funding for the digital channel. Meanwhile, the annual report said the BBC as a whole had screened 'content reflecting all of Scotland', including dramas Shetland, starring Ashley Jensen, Rebus – with Richard Rankin in the title role - and Granite Harbour, as well as documentary series Murder Trial, Inside Barlinnie [prison], and Sir Alex, about Sir Alex Ferguson, Britain's most decorated football manager. Award-winning The Agency: Unfiltered returned for a third series searching for Scotland's top influencer and attracting younger audiences. The report said 'Scotland-produced audio content' performed well on BBC Sounds and BBC Sport with Sportsound at six million plays. BBC Radio nan Gàidheal launched a 'celebration of new Gaelic song and composition', Òran Ùr. The report said 56 per cent of adults in Scotland consume BBC Scotland content on average per week, down from 57 per cent the previous year. Muriel Gray, chairman of the Scotland committee of the BBC, said: 'During the year, the committee has discussed and reviewed a number of critical areas, including major news changes introduced by BBC Scotland in January, BBC Radio Scotland's audience performances, the role of television drama in driving iPlayer growth, and the renewal of the BBC's partnership with MG ALBA.' In January, the BBC's new boss in Scotland claimed people may not be paying for a TV licence because of the cost of living crisis and the wide choice of programmes across streaming services. Ms Valentine, who became Director of BBC Scotland in October, defended News at Seven when she appeared before MPs at the Scottish Affairs Committee in the Commons. A BBC spokesman said: 'Fluctuations in recorded spend can be due to several factors including variations in the transmission dates of scripted content and special content, for example related to the Euros. 'This is reflected in the accounts. 'The BBC Scotland channel is the top performer after the leading 5 channels - BBC1, BBC2, ITV1, C4 and C5 - and audiences also watch the channel's content on the iPlayer. 'The cost per user hour for the channel has fallen year on year and in 2024/25, and BBC Scotland content had 1million weekly active users on iPlayer..'
