Business Homework Solutions
Problem
#40326

Business Law Case on Contracts

After reading the case (pls. see the attached file), answer the following questions:

1. What are the four elements of a valid contract?
2. Describe the objective theory of contracts. How does that theory apply to this case?
3. Why do you think the court held that there was not a valid agreement here?
4. Are advertisements generally considered offers? Why or why not?
5. How does this case differ from a reward situation, where a unilateral contract is formed upon completion of the requested act?


Case:
LEAD STORY-DATELINE:
Wall Street Journal, August 9, 1999.
John D.R. Leonard took PepsiCo seriously when one of their "Pepsistuff" commercials made an offer of a Harrier jet, the famous high-tech "jump jet" used by the U.S. Marines. In a TV commercial that aired in 1995, Pepsi jokingly included the Harrier as one of the prizes that could be received with a "mere" 7 million Pepsi points. While that sounds like a lot of points to get from drinking Pepsi products (roughly 190 Pepsis a day for 100 years), the company also allowed customers to purchase points for 10 cents a piece.
Leonard did the math, and discovered that the cost of the 7 million points needed for the jet was a mere $700,000. He then put together a business plan, raised the $700,000 from friends and family, and submitted 15 Pepsi points, the check, and an official order form along with a demand for the Harrier jet.
PepsiCo wrote back, stating: "The Harrier jet in the Pepsi commercial is fanciful and is simply included to create a humorous and entertaining ad. We apologize for any misunderstanding or confusion that you may have experienced and are enclosing some free product coupons for your use."
The free coupons did not satisfy Leonard, who then took PepsiCo to task in court. Finally, on August 5, 1999, a federal judge for the Southern District of New York held that PepsiCo was only joking when it implied in its ad that it was giving away fighter jets. Judge Wood noted that since the jets sell for approximately $23 million each, "no objective person could reasonably have concluded that the commercial actually offered consumers a Harrier jet." Instead, this was a classic example of "a deal too good to be true."

Attached file(s):
Attachments
Article.doc  View File

Attachment Content Summary (Note: view attachment at the above link before purchasing. Actual attachment content may vary slightly from that shown below.)

Article.doc
LEAD STORY-DATELINE:

Wall Street Journal, August 9, 1999.

John D.R. Leonard took HYPERLINK "http://www.pepsico.com/" \t "_blank"
PepsiCo seriously when one of their "Pepsistuff" commercials made an
offer of a Harrier jet, the famous high-tech "jump jet" used by the
HYPERLINK "http://www.usmc.mil/" \t "_blank" U.S. Marines . In a TV
commercial that aired in 1995, Pepsi jokingly included the Harrier as
one of the prizes that could be received with a "mere" 7 million Pepsi
points. While that sounds like a lot of points to get from drinking
Pepsi products (roughly 190 Pepsis a day for 100 years), the company
also allowed customers to purchase points for 10 cents a piece.

Leonard did the math, and discovered that the cost of the 7 million
points needed for the jet was a mere $700,000. He then put together a
business plan, raised the $700,000 from friends and family, and
submitted 15 Pepsi points, the check, and an official order form along
with a demand for the Harrier jet.

PepsiCo wrote back, stating: "The Harrier jet in the Pepsi commercial is
fanciful and is simply included to create a humorous and entertaining
ad. We apologize for any misunderstanding or confusion that you may have
experienced and are enclosing some free product coupons for your use."

The free coupons did not satisfy Leonard, who then took PepsiCo to task
in court. Finally, on August 5, 1999, a federal judge for the Southern
District of New York held that PepsiCo was only joking when it implied
in its ad that it was giving away fighter jets. Judge Wood noted that
since the jets sell for approximately $23 million each, "no objective
person could reasonably have concluded that the commercial actually
offered consumers a Harrier jet." Instead, this was a classic example of
"a deal too good to be true."

Solution Summary

There are answers to questions on a case on Pepsico

Solution
What is this?
By OTA - Overall OTA Rating
Purchase Cost Now
$2.19 CAD (was ~$7.98)
Included in Download
  • Plain text response
$2.19 Instant Download
Add to Cart
Why you can trust BrainMass.com
  • Your Information is Secure
  • Best Online Academic Help Service
  • Students find real academic Success
Related Solutions
Browse