The protagonists are clowns.
Wasting time with a lawsuit. I don't care if Pepsi is a big, bad corporation. Those guys are typically braindead adventure bros.
shareI can't disagree more. The clown is the judge who threw the suit out.
Pepsi ran a campaign, these guys played by the rules, and then Pepsi reneged on the offer. Pepsi is very clearly at fault here and the judge let them off the hook.
Only a child (or a man-boy, like the stoner big brother figure) would think there was an offer to begin with.
It's like if you tell a child, "I'll be back in two seconds", and then they count, "1, 2, 3, 4.... YOU LIED! You were gone for 34 seconds!
In the world of business, technicalities and fine print matter. Fact is, Pepsi decided not to include any fine print (on purpose, it seems, to give the illusion that the jet really is attainable). That's their fuck up.
shareDEFEND BIG CORPORATION AT ALL COSTS.
shareAre you saying that, or do you think it's something that I would say?
shareWow, I didn't think my post needed an explanation. I was mocking you.
shareI need an explanation please.
How can you mock him for, like everyone else in the world, understanding the fighter jet was a joke.
It needs an explanation because, if you were mocking me, it means you believe my position/motivation is "Defend big corporation at all cost". Which makes zero sense if you read my posts. It's as if I replied "LET'S EAT DOG FOR DINNER EVERY NIGHT." That would imply I believe you are an advocate for eating dogs often. But it would make no sense because you never advocated for eating dogs.
It's such a goofy, random idea to even put out there as a strawman in reply to me. The level of thought that would get you to that is the same level that would make someone think the fighter jet was real!
I suppose I should have put a fine print disclaimer at the bottom of my posts, for Q-Anon and other gullible kooks, that might think I'm the the Illuminati's secret propaganda area of corporate shills infiltrate Movie Chat to grouse about the latest Addams Family adaptation while laying the ground for the Koch Brothers' latest takeover.
You're just another anonymous idiot on a forum, why would anyone think your comments are legally binding like advertisement? Try to be more clever next time, hun.
sharePepsi didn't run an offer. They ran a commercial that included an obvious joke. Of course the case was tossed.
shareIf you watch the documentary it seems obvious that they did not include the fine print in the American version of the ad because they wanted young folk to actually believe the jet was attainable, and consequently buy more Pepsi. (By contrast, they did include it in the Canadian ad, indicating that they understood the legal importance of it.)
This was just another bail-out of a multi-million dollar corporation. Pepsi fucked up and should've had to pay for it.
I think it's a bit of both really. It was obviously a joke but probably used to further interest the young audience.
"If you watch the documentary it seems obvious ... they wanted young folk to actually believe the jet was attainable, and consequently buy more Pepsi."
I watched the documentary. It did not seem obvious to me, nor to FilmBuff (above). The kid who tried for the jet, now aged, acknowledges as much; he knows that viewers of the film will start thinking "You idiot!" as soon as the story is introduced, and from start to finish he's apologizing for his naïveté.
No, no "young folk" bought Pepsi to try to get the jet. It was just that one wacky obsessive dude who was groomed, then bankrolled, by the narcissistic surfer bro Todd Hoffman. I wonder what other laughable endeavors he has funded.
How do you think Todd Hoffman became rich? Multimillionaires don't usually exist living all "anti-corporation", no matter how much peyote they smoke and granola bars they eat. It was a snobby corporate capitalist—"Soda tastes gross, I just drink Peruvian mountain tea"—f'ing around with another corporation that he thought was uncool. The kid, encouraged, was the victim.
So you are saying then that you don't believe it really was the kid's idea and he took it to Todd? They are just lying about that?
shareagreed, lawyers offered him $1m initially, which kinda means that the guy had a case against pepsi
share