Fabrizio, you might have seen the investment bank Morgan Stanley's study titled "Swiss watches: the power of icons," which argues that well-recognized "iconic" watches have become the foundation of financial prosperity for many major brands. What are your thoughts on Bvlgari's legacy in the context of this research? Which watches from the House can be considered iconic?
— The watch industry is associated with traditions. We see the same watches for 50-70 years. Stability is why people invest in Swiss watches. There are many timepieces on the market whose ages are hard to recall. Bvlgari holds a truly unique position. Firstly, we are not Swiss. We hail from Italy, from Rome. Secondly, our iconic watches are quite different and sometimes older than those of our competitors.
Today, models from the 1970s are particularly popular, but we have even earlier pieces. Bvlgari-branded watches have been known for over 100 years, although back then they were only jewelry pieces. For example, the Serpenti, which celebrated its 75th anniversary last year. Every time we create new Serpenti watches, we aim not for repetition but for adding to the story: it could be the one-of-a-kind three-dimensional Tubogas bracelet, high-jewelry watches inspired by Cleopatra's adornments, or "secret" (with a dial covered by a lid) watches.
The first watches available to the public appeared at the House in the 1970s — the legendary Bvlgari Bvlgari. During my career at the House, I have reinterpreted their case three or four times. Ultimately, the logo, which was placed on the bezel for the first time in history, is the most important element of their design.
The Octo Finissimo is also considered an icon, despite its youth, as these watches are only 10 years old. They are our flagship men's watches, avant-garde in terms of technology and design, completely unlike other iconic models. Serpenti Tubogas is a women's model that wraps around the wrist. People either love or dislike Serpenti, but it's hard to find other watches with such a unique attachment style. Finissimo represents ultra-thin watches. While there are other thin watches on the market, Finissimo is the only one with an integrated bracelet, a titanium case, and an unparalleled design. Thus, our signature models are indeed difficult to compare with others. Bvlgari was originally a modern brand, not a vintage one. This is our main distinction.
How challenging is it to create new versions of iconic models? How do you maintain a balance between the original concept and modernity?
— This is the most challenging part of my job. The House has many iconic elements, and our heritage is incredibly rich; I am fortunate to work with various iconic details. Frankly, managing heritage isn't a problem for me, as I'm not fixated on strictly adhering to the brand's aesthetic codes. I strive to improve the product each time and, if I am unsure of success, I look for other solutions. However, the most important thing is the combination of innovation and tradition. You need to know your codes well and respect them. Only with respect and understanding of heritage can you create innovations. You also need to be able to look at things from a new perspective. Without this, you risk falling into a vicious cycle of creating the same watches. If you have a dynamic approach and knowledge of the codes, you can do anything. But the hardest part is to see the brand's and collection's codes in development, on the horizon of 10-15 years. I constantly reflect on what will happen with Finissimo and what the next Serpenti will be like.
To conclude this topic, what is your opinion on the vintage-style watches that are popular among modern manufacturers?
— Brands simply pull models from the archives of the 1940s, 50s, and 60s and reissue them. They change the dial colors to trendy ones and modernize, but essentially, they are the same watches. Of course, technologies have changed, but they do not make them fundamentally new. For us, such an approach makes no sense. Even among our jewelry pieces, you won't find a large number of replicas. This is because Gianni Bulgari in the 70s and 80s aimed to create a unique aesthetic for the brand. He looked to the future; his approach was futuristic. Remember the modularity of jewelry, the use of steel, and the play with coins and silk threads in necklaces. Bvlgari has never been interested in reissuing vintage items with minimal changes.
From a creative standpoint, reissuing is the easiest and safest path, without risk. From a marketing perspective, it creates a connection to heritage. "Looks like my grandfather's watch... Reminds me of my father's watch... I want one just like that!" — this is the emotional connection that arises for customers. But then the company doesn’t move forward; it continues to tell the same story.
Many brands fixated on vintage make mistakes when trying to create something new. They immediately revert to the familiar. Because when they attempt to create a completely new case, dial, and aesthetic, it becomes evident that they lack confidence. Frankly, sometimes the results are compositions that don’t work from a geometric perspective or in terms of elements. It’s clear that many brands are only capable of repeating their iconic products. When they try to change and say, "Now we will do something different," it becomes obvious that they lack the right mindset.
Another current trend is collaborations. Not the kind that used to exist, where watch brands collaborated with car manufacturers, racing, and football teams. It’s about collaborations where different brands come together to create joint models, like MB&F and H. Moser & Cie. or Swatch and Omega. Bvlgari has experience collaborating with Bacs & Russo and other collaborations with architects and artists. Do you think this method has potential?
— Collaborations are interesting because they allow us to look at familiar things from a different angle. When we communicate with co-partners, we gain a fresh perspective. However, the collaboration must be mutually acceptable. If a partner proposes something that doesn’t align with the brand's codes, we cannot agree to it. Conversely, if we suggest an idea that doesn’t suit the partner, they won’t accept it. With Aurelie Bacs, it was clear, as he doesn’t make watches himself, but he is a fantastic connoisseur and a well-known figure in the watch world since Phillips is one of the largest auction houses specializing in watches. However, collaboration with Japanese architects Tadao Ando and Kazuyo Sejima represents a different approach. We discussed architectural elements of Finissimo with them. To me, Finissimo, with its large surface area of the bracelet and dial representing the concept of "second skin," is a pure canvas where our partners have the opportunity to express their style. By the way, we are currently working on a new, incredibly exciting collaboration, honestly speaking.
However, for example, in the Aluminium model, we only "play" with the dial. I am concerned about future limited editions, as simply creating a new dial is not enough. We receive many requests, but I always ask, why should we make a limited edition with yet another partner: "Is there something in common that unites us?" If yes — great, if not, then it’s just commerce. When we look at the mirrored Octo Finissimo Sejima, we hear enthusiastic feedback: "Wow, these are fantastic watches, like a mirror!" or "The idea is to see your face and the time, to see how time reflects on your face." That’s why I emphasize that a limited edition should not just have a unique dial. The most important thing is the thought behind the piece. If there’s no idea, then a "limited edition" is just an aesthetic that you may or may not like. But when there is a thought, even if you don’t like it, you can appreciate it and say: "This isn’t quite my taste, but the idea is fantastic!"