Formula 1 has been navigating a complex political hurdle in 2026 that is entirely outside of its control.
Ongoing instability in the Middle East has forced the rescheduling or cancellation of two of F1’s premier events in the region, the Qatar Airways Bahrain Grand Prix and the STC Saudi Arabian Grand Prix.
The Bahrain race will instead take place at the Sepang International Circuit under the same name, while F1 continues to evaluate options for the end of the season regarding scheduled rounds in Qatar and Abu Dhabi.
According to American global investment firm Guggenheim Partners, the races in Bahrain and Saudi Arabia contribute approximately £86.15 million in combined annual race hosting fees, representing 14% of the overall revenue from F1’s race hosting contracts for 2026.
Yet, the minimal financial fallout from these disrupted races is thanks to F1’s structural resilience, which has strengthened significantly in recent years, according to Loughborough University sports finance expert Dr Dan Plumley.
“F1 has done really well to diversify its income. You’ve got a total revenue of about £3.1 billion, and hosting fees make up only about 21% of that, down from about a third,” Plumley told Sector.
“They’ve looked at sponsorship and commercial opportunities to diversify income to negate the hits that they’ve taken here. So there is a financial hit, but they are okay to cope with it.”
Mid-season disruptions are not unfamiliar territory.
During the COVID-19 pandemic, F1 restructured an entire season on short notice and became the first global sport to restart, staging back-to-back races at identical circuits and calling on historic European venues to fill the gaps.
However, the primary bottleneck isn’t just financial – it is logistical. Decision-making on calendar changes must happen far more rapidly in F1 than in other global sports due to the massive volume of freight moved worldwide.
Official logistics partner DHL transports between 1,200 and 1,400 metric tonnes of high-value equipment per race, meaning last-minute detours create immense operational headaches.
“Shifting a race from Bahrain to Malaysia still comes at a significant cost,” notes Plumley.
“Whether that outweighs the original cost of running in Bahrain depends on a lot of offsetting variables behind the scenes. Likewise, closing out a season in Europe can actually lower expenses simply because the transport is easier to manage.”
Beyond freight logistics, broadcast agreements and sporting regulations complicate substitute planning. Under the FIA F1 Sporting Regulations, daylight races are subject to strict start-time buffers relative to local sunset times for safety, while international rights-holders rely on fixed broadcast slots.
“There are wider challenges around the broadcasting deals, how they’re set up, the time zones in other countries that have signed up for a race which would take place at 3pm European time,” says Plumley.
“There will also be some offset for sponsors who will have signed up for something that’s not going to be delivered. So the whole thing gets impacted, all the way through, in terms of revenue from hosting fees, broadcasting contracts, and commercial sponsorships.”
Looking ahead, Plumley suggests F1’s long-term contingency planning amid the Middle East conflict will rely on keeping European venues on standby.
“They’re contractually obliged to run so many races to hit their season marker anyway,” explains Plumley.
“If you look at race tracks that have fallen off the calendar in the last few years that would be able to step in and host in a replacement type scenario, I think that would certainly be the preference of F1 – and they’ve made noises to suggest that.”
