To what extent should you take advertisements or commercials seriously?
If a company advertises that if you purchase their products you will earn some points that will qualify you to earn some gift items, will you take that seriously or will you assume that it is just a bluff or puffery?
For instance, if MTN NG advertises that if you subscribe to their network service you will be eligible to win a car, house or even an aeroplane; to what extent will you take such advertisements seriously?
Well, the answer to this issue is not a straightforward one, what the court has determined in a series of cases that borders on similar issues like this is that the content of the commercials and the messages passed will be examined to determine if it is to be taken seriously or to be a regarded as a puffery or a bluff made just to capture attentions; but where do advertisers draw the line because there is a thin line between puffery and deception.
Tekedia Mini-MBA edition 16 (Feb 10 – May 3, 2025) opens registrations; register today for early bird discounts.
Tekedia AI in Business Masterclass opens registrations here.
Join Tekedia Capital Syndicate and invest in Africa’s finest startups here.
In a landmark case, which is popularly known as “the Pepsi Points case or the Harrier Jet case”, a commercial where a company promised to give out Harrier Jet to their customers was held to be a puffery and was never to be taken seriously by the viewers or consumers of the products.
Here are the summary facts of the case; In 1996, Pepsi company ran a commercial, the catchy message in the commercial is that customers could earn Pepsi points by buying or consuming the Pepsi beverage, these points could, in turn, be traded for physical gift items like branded T-shirts, face caps, leather jackets and even a Harrier Jet.
The option of possibly winning a Harrier jet was what drew a lot of attention to the advert. The plaintiff in this case, John Leonard, a young lad in his early twenties saw the commercial and swore to himself that he must win the Harrier jet. He was able to convince a rich close friend of his to lend him some money which he used and purchased the Pepsi Points at 10¢ per point totalling $700,008.50.
He delivered this cheque to PepsiCo and then demanded that he should be given the jet in return.
PepsiCo told Leonard that there was no jet anywhere to be given to anybody, moreover, Harrier Jet is Military equipment which a civilian like John or any other private individual is prohibited from owning, therefore, the advert to give out Harrier Jet was just a puffery and a bluff just to draw attention. The Pepsi company also claimed that the commercial constitutes no offer and as it is the principle of the law of contract, where there is no offer there won’t be any corresponding acceptance.
Leonard then sued PepsiCo, in an effort to enforce the offer and acceptance perceived by Leonard to be made in the advertisement.
The court held in favour of PepsiCo stating that the commercial was merely bluff and frivolous and that it cannot constitute an offer in the law of contract.
This case is reported in: Leonard v. Pepsico, Inc., 88 F. Supp. 2d 116, aff’d 210 F.3d 88