The world of luxury watchmaking is in turmoil over a controversial term. The “Holy Trinity”, used to designate three emblematic brands, is the subject of debate. Is this concept still relevant in 2024? Dive into this controversy that agitates enthusiasts and discover why this term is so talked about!
The “Holy Trinity”: a modern marketing expression?
Contrary to what some people think, the term “Holy Trinity” is not a recent advertising slogan. Used since the 1970s to designate Audemars Piguet, Patek Philippe and Vacheron Constantin, its exact origin remains unknown, but it is unlikely that it was created by the brands themselves. This term reflects a time when these three manufacturers dominated high-end watchmaking.
In the 1970s, this trio stood out for its mastery of mechanical watch complications, an exceptional level of manual finishing and the absence of serious competition in the luxury watch segment.
An eternal throne?
The current controversy surrounding the “Holy Trinity” raises several questions. Do these three brands still deserve their status? Has the term become just a buzzword? Is it an integral part of watchmaking language?
The debate crystallizes around the meaning of the term: does it designate the “best” watch brands at a given time? Or simply three historic factories occupying a special place in the collective imagination?
A changing watchmaking landscape
Since the 1970s, the world of watchmaking has evolved considerably with the emergence of talented independent brands, the rebirth of historic houses and the arrival of new technological players.
Who could claim the title of “Holy Trinity” today? Independent watchmakers like FP Journe, Laurent Ferrier or Philippe Dufour? Brands with a major cultural impact like Rolex, Casio or Apple? High-end manufacturers like A. Lange & Söhne or Jaeger-LeCoultre? The difficulty of choosing underlines the subjectivity and complexity of the debate.
Brand tribalism
The controversy surrounding the “Holy Trinity” reflects a broader phenomenon: the rise of tribalism around brands, the exacerbation of rivalries between fans on social networks and the feeling of injustice felt by admirers of other manufacturers.
This debate raises questions about how we value brands, our need to prioritize and categorize, and the impact of social media on our perception of luxury brands.
An innocent or obsolete term?
The debate around the “Holy Trinity” highlights several aspects of our relationship with watchmaking: the difficulty of objectively defining what makes a brand great, the rapid evolution of the watchmaking landscape and the need to question our certainties, as well as the tendency to overreact to terms anchored in common language.
Should we abandon the expression “Holy Trinity”? For some, it remains a simple way of designating three historic brands. For others, it perpetuates an outdated vision of luxury watchmaking.
The “Holy Trinity” of watchmaking continues to be debated in 2024. This term, far from being a simple marketing tool, reflects the complex history of the high-end watch industry. Although contested, it raises fascinating questions about the evolution of luxury, our relationship with brands and the way we value watchmaking excellence. Whether you are in favor of maintaining it or abandoning it, one thing is certain: the passion aroused by this debate testifies to the vitality and richness of the contemporary watchmaking world.
SRQ Backlot