21-year-old American business student sued Pepsi for not giving him a $32 million fighter jet

Soft drinks company Pepsi and a fighter jet are at the centre of one of the strangest stories you might ever read.

The saga produced one of the most famous contract law cases in American history.

It all started when the drinks giant offered a fighter jet that could be redeemed against a staggering amount of reward points.

One American actually met the requirements for the offer – and sued the company for his fighter jet.

DISCOVER SBX CARS: The global premium car auction platform powered by Supercar Blondie

Pepsi goes big in advertising – almost too big

Back in the 1990s, Pepsi and Coca-Cola were involved in a massive rivalry.

The two drinks giants were in direct competition – especially in the American market.

Pepsi wanted to start appealing to a younger buyer and market.

March 1996 saw the unveiling of the Pepsi Stuff campaign, and its scale was massive.

To put it simply, purchases of the soft drink products would earn Pepsi points.

These points could then be redeemed for various items, such as baseball caps and leather jackets.

To really generate a buzz, the company advertised a truly unique ‘prize’ as part of the promotion.

The prize in question was a McDonnell-Douglas AV8 Harrier II fighter jet.

Yes, that’s right – for 7,000,000 points, you could redeem a Harrier fighter jet.

Most people saw the advert, which, technically, achieved its aim – and they laughed it off.

One business student, however, decided to take the challenge literally.

John Leonard, who was 21 back in 1995, found it was possible to purchase the points for 10 cents each.

Therefore, the 7,000,000 points would, in theory, cost him $700,000.

Leonard convinced five investors, including friend Todd Hoffman, to help him buy the points.

You’ve gotta fight, for your right…to a fighter jet?

Leonard then sent his points, alongside a check, to the drinks company in order to redeem the fighter jet.

As you can probably guess, Pepsi refused to honor the redemption, claiming that the commercial was a joke.

Leonard, in turn, decided to file a lawsuit in Miami accusing PepsiCo of breach of contract, fraud, deceptive and unfair trade practices, and misleading advertising.

Perhaps predictably, the case was thrown out by Judge Kimba Wood, who rejected the claim for several reasons.

The main reasoning for rejecting the claim was that a contract had not been formed between Leonard and Pepsi.

It was made clear by Judge Wood that the advert was ‘clearly done in jest’ and that no reasonable person could have expected Pepsi to actually be offering a $37 million fighter jet to anyone.

The case was appealed to the US Court of Appeals, but the court upheld Judge Wood’s verdict for the exact same reasons.

The Pepsi advert was later altered to increase the number of points required for the jet from seven million to 700 million. A ‘just kidding’ disclaimer was also added.The post 21-year-old American business student sued Pepsi for not giving him a $32 million fighter jet appeared first on Supercar Blondie.