....Surely the category of the "Big Three" is as arbitrary as any other. So I can ignore it. Done!
Why is there a desire or need for this category? What's the purpose of it? It only matters to those that care for the criteria that mark that category.
If watches are about making you happy - which I think is the only justification - then I'd say that amongst those generalised twenty-somethings (why is age involved? why not just non-enthusiast new watch purchaser?) a brand like TAG-Heuer (from what I've observed) tends provides the first swoon of proud watch ownership. A bigger achievement than surviving the peaks and troughs a la PP etc? Not 100% sure, but it is significant and I have far too jaundiced eyes to really evaluate.
That said, I do think history is important, it's certainly lucrative.
As you've mentioned before, it all comes down to intent and context. I'd add that it's authenticity that matters.
Wierd lifestyle-type advertising makes me shake my head but doesn't particulary concern me. If I take that 'happiness' factor into account, the lifestyle-type stuff makes perfect sense, just don't insult my intelligence. As soon as you trumpet your 18th century start-up date while neglecting the 50 years your brand sat in a a drawer...you've lost me. As soon as you trumpet your massive technical achievement and it's not even yours or is unfalsifiable...you've lost me. As soon as you make stupid claims about 1000+m WR, Titanium grade 5 or first xxxxxxxx or aerospace/motosport/,military comparisons...you've lost me. Which leaves me with....vintage....... oh.