Can Innovation Outshine Heritage? Untouchable? Decisions?

[Champagnepapi]

Hi Enthusiasts,

With all the recent news, controversies and interviews about the watch industry, it got me wondering—are the “Holy Trinity” brands like PP, AP, and others like Rolex truly able to hold their top spots because of their history, heritage, and the remarkable pieces they produce? I’ve intentionally left RM out of this, as that feels more hype-driven garbage (no offense ).

Could these legacy brands ever lose their place in terms of demand and desirability due to poor decisions or shifts in management, especially if they continue to alienate collectors? We’ve seen a few once-popular companies fall off due to management missteps.

Do you think there could be a scenario where, ten years from now, these “untouchable” brands today are replaced by others that are making real efforts to innovate? For instance—Rexhep Rexhepi (Akrivia), MB&F, FPJ, H Moser, R Gauthier, RD, ALS, Urwerk, Gronefeld, Greubel Forsey, Simon Brette, De Bethune, Berneron, Bernard Lederer, or even entirely new brands led by artisans from within the industry.

Is it possible that a brand’s reputation alone can keep it untouchable, or do you think innovation or poor leadership choices could eventually shift the status quo?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[AR.Morris]

Hey, interesting topic!

I think you’re absolutely right to question if even the most prestigious watch brands are immune to losing their place at the top. The strength of brands like PP, AP, and Rolex is definitely rooted in their heritage, but heritage can only carry them so far if they’re not adapting to changes in the market or collector preferences. History and quality have earned them an “untouchable” reputation, yet we’ve seen that mismanagement, reluctance to evolve, or alienating collectors can chip away at even the strongest reputations over time.

[AR.Morris]

Could the Holy Trinity Brands Be Replaced?

It’s not unthinkable. The watch world is seeing an exciting wave of innovation from independent brands and newer makers like Rexhep Rexhepi, MB&F, and H. Moser. These brands bring fresh ideas and often a more personal connection to their creations, which appeals to collectors looking for something beyond tradition. Some independents are excelling in technical and design innovation in ways that established brands might be slower to explore, and they’re building strong followings as a result. Given time, brands like these could attract a new generation of collectors who value creativity and boldness over legacy alone.

[metallic]

Just as a general response, unrelated to watch companies, all companies are probably doomed to eventual failure. Even the behemoth Apples, Microsofts, and Amazons of today. Technology, newer ideas, varying trends all eventually doom most companies over the long haul. It is all part of normal business.

Watch companies and luxury goods companies are more likely to stand the test of time. They are typically not greatly affected by technology because they are not technological products for the most part. Look at Vacheron Constantin from the 1700's. Though it has changed hands over time, it still does exist. In short, luxury goods companies can hold up over time, but they can also make major errors and lose their customer following. Patek is not immune to losing its fanbase.

[AR.Morris]

Heritage vs. Innovation

Heritage gives these brands an undeniable aura. Collectors love the story, the history, and the connection to tradition that brands like PP and AP offer. However, as the market evolves, it’s clear that heritage alone might not always be enough. Younger collectors, for example, seem more interested in technical innovation, new aesthetics, and experimental brands. The rise of independent watchmakers like Rexhep Rexhepi, MB&F, and F.P. Journe shows that innovation can indeed capture interest and disrupt the status quo.

[AR.Morris]

Is Reputation Enough?

Reputation is powerful, but it’s not invincible. While established brands benefit from being seen as “classics,” reputation alone won’t keep them on top if they’re not maintaining quality or addressing what modern collectors care about. If they get too comfortable resting on their laurels, they might find that the market’s moved on without them. On the other hand, we’re seeing independent brands that actively prioritize innovation, quality, and connection to collectors—all qualities that could sustain demand and desirability over the long run.

[AR.Morris]

Final Thoughts

I think we’re in an era where collectors are open to exploration and aren’t solely focused on legacy brands. It doesn’t mean that PP or Rolex will be “replaced” overnight, but if independents keep innovating, and the Holy Trinity brands don’t adapt, the industry could shift in interesting ways. We’re likely looking at a future where tradition and innovation coexist—where heritage brands have to keep proving themselves and