The Saiera commercial partnership agreements that Formula GP and Formula Femme teams have been signing for the past two seasons are, by the published numbers, the most generous data partnership deals in the history of either series. The headline figures are well above market rate. Several teams have publicly attributed their improved competitive position to the partnership.
I have seen one of these agreements. Specifically, I have seen page 31 of one of these agreements, which was photographed for me by a team principal who declined to be named but who agreed to be quoted.
Page 31 contains a clause titled, in plain text, Cognitive Data Collection — Driver Performance Telemetry Integration. It authorises Saiera to integrate the team’s pre-race, in-race, and post-race driver biometric telemetry into the Saiera analytical infrastructure. It grants Saiera the right to retain that data after the partnership ends. It defines the retention period as: perpetual, for research and development purposes consistent with the Saiera Corporation research framework.
The team principal told me that the clause was not discussed in the negotiation. He told me he had read pages 1 through 28. He told me that pages 29 through 33 are titled Technical Appendix, and that they are formatted in a smaller typeface, and that no one on his side read them in detail.
He is not stupid. He is a person with a job that does not include reading legal appendices in a smaller typeface on the day before pre-season testing.
I have spoken to four former Saiera Corporation engineers in the past three weeks. Three have confirmed the architecture exists. One has confirmed that the architecture is the same architecture referenced in the SCR-CMAP-0047 document I published in File 001. The fourth, who left Saiera in 2024, told me she resigned over the integration plan and that she does not want her name attached to this. I have honoured that.
The Global Motorsport Federation has, separately, raised concerns. A GMF technical compliance officer I spoke with described the structure of the agreement as “commercially novel and ethically untested.” That phrase appeared in a draft internal memorandum that was, I have been told, revised before circulation. The revised version uses softer language.
Saiera Corporation issued a statement when I sent them a list of questions. The statement is two paragraphs. It says the partnerships are standard commercial agreements, that all parties consent to all terms, and that the Cognitive Data Collection clause is “a routine telemetry provision in line with established industry practice.”
It is not. There is no established industry practice for perpetual retention of driver biometric data by a commercial partner who is also a competitor in the same series. There is no precedent. There is, in fact, a body of regulation that specifically prohibits competitor data exchange in both series. The Cognitive Data Collection clause is positioned, in the agreement, as a partnership benefit. It is, structurally, a competitor data exchange wearing different clothes.
The team principal who showed me page 31 has asked me not to disclose his team or his series. I am honouring that. I will note only that there are more than thirty teams across Formula GP and Formula Femme. The agreement language is identical, the principal told me, across every Saiera partnership he is aware of. He is aware of seven.
I am still looking.