The Audemars Piguet × Swatch collaboration is making waves. And as is so often the case when luxury deigns to seat itself at the table of the accessible, opinion cleaves sharply in two: on one side, the guardians of the temple; on the other, the apostles of openness. A wise move or a misstep? Views are divided, and I myself struggle to render a verdict. The truth — more uncomfortable, as truth tends to be — lies elsewhere. It compels us to look squarely at what luxury is becoming, and what it stands to lose if it can no longer distinguish between calculated risk and naked opportunism.
I will always carry with me the formula of Jean-Noël Kapferer, repeated like a catechism in the lecture halls of the great business schools: “Where marketing must bend the offer to the market, luxury must preserve what sets it apart — even when that runs counter to the customer’s expectations.” Luxury was never about pleasing — it was about enchanting, about keeping the world at arm’s length, about tending the myth. An aristocratic posture that built empires.
But times change. So do expectations. Today, the shift is complete and undeniable. Luxury brands can no longer afford to barricade themselves behind the conceit that they may impose their vision against all prevailing winds. That particular privilege has expired.
And yet the answer cannot simply be to follow where the market leads — not as brands have done in recent years. Everything has been too smooth, too carefully neutralised. We have witnessed an accelerating erasure: a methodical flattening that, in the name of universality, has drained the life from every vital impulse. Luxury must recover its roughness — it must cease its fear of giving offence. The texture of a brand is that grain which catches the light, that relief which refuses to be forgotten: a raw detail, occasionally unsettling, which lends the brand its depth and its breath. With it, a brand becomes singular, human, alive. It generates emotion and inscribes difference. Voices within the industry are beginning to rise, for there is a palpable sense that we stand at a turning point. Éric Briones, director of the Journal du Luxe, calls for the passage “from a luxury of desirability to a luxury of resonance.” Jean-Noël Kapferer speaks of an “existential problem” the industry must confront. But the answer, to my mind, has always been there: restore roughness to the heart of the narrative. A luxury without fault lines — without humanity — is nothing but a mirage. True luxury has always been the kind that dares, that cuts, that commits.
It is precisely here that the AP × Swatch collaboration interests me, and deserves to be examined with rigour rather than dismissed with the brutality of instinctive reaction. Omega and Blancpain have already ventured down this particular side road with Swatch, and emerged with their reputations intact. The question, therefore, is not whether such an alliance is legitimate in principle — it is. The only question worth asking is whether it is sincere: whether it proceeds from a vision, from an internal coherence, from genuine conviction — or whether it is merely the Pavlovian response of a house startled by a slowing market. Why does this matter? Because opportunism is always visible. It leaves traces. And in the world of luxury, a betrayal of the DNA is never forgiven — it is paid for, sometimes decades later, in the currency of perceived value.
Contact Guillaume Jourdan via LinkedIn
