John Leonard was to me, what a lot of kids who saw this advertisement on tv were like. That's mentioned several times in the documentary but it is absolutely true. I remember seeing the ad (here in Canada) and wondering why there was no disclaimer. The movie says there was, maybe it was changed or there's a good chance I just didn't see it, but very clearly in the American version, it wasn't there. And so the quest began to have one American kid get a Harrier Jet.
Now, there's tons of discussion about the rights and wrongs, but to me it seemed pretty clear: He should get the jet. Pepsi, my favorite soda company, made a big mistake. The documentary makes frequent references back to the execs who were in staff when this commercial ran, and except for the creative guy, none of them take responsibility for the glaring fact that they messed up. That's all there is to it. Now, let's also be clear, you understand why. Even with statute of limitations, there may be a way that the case could be re-tried so they have to deny, deny, deny. But the fact is, the commercial showed three other products and the Pepsi points it would take to get them and then the jet and the points required to get it. The pamphlet that was found on the Cindy Crawford display said you could buy the rest of the points to get to a certain point level. And Pepsi seems to be guilty of some pretty sloppy contests in the past. All of this is to say, it seems obvious that Pepsi made a mistake they wished they hadn't and then refused to own up to it.
One of the things that I noticed the documentary didnt really touch on or rather, that it avoided, was what 'the kid' would do with the jet if he got it and why he wanted it. It WAS touched upon in several occasions but there didn't seem to be a final statement made by John about it. Probably intentional. The jet is worth a lot of money and it became fairly obvious he wouldn't be able to fly it if he procured it, so was his intent to acquire then sell it? From what I gleaned, it just seemed that his intent was that he merely wanted the jet, and hadn't thought too much past that, but for his friend to pony up $700K it would seem a given that at the end of the day, John sells the jet and makes away with a huge payout. One thing also not fully spoken about was if John eventually ended up getting anything from Pepsi and how his lawyers got paid for their work.
Regardless, this was an entertaining documentary. John's mother does come off as a bit of a conspiracy theorist but a doting mom, and those surrounding John (even to an extent, Michael, his lawyer) come off as people who really care for someone who was a good kid with intentions that were more technicality based than greed.
My take? He deserves that jet.
Now, there's tons of discussion about the rights and wrongs, but to me it seemed pretty clear: He should get the jet. Pepsi, my favorite soda company, made a big mistake. The documentary makes frequent references back to the execs who were in staff when this commercial ran, and except for the creative guy, none of them take responsibility for the glaring fact that they messed up. That's all there is to it. Now, let's also be clear, you understand why. Even with statute of limitations, there may be a way that the case could be re-tried so they have to deny, deny, deny. But the fact is, the commercial showed three other products and the Pepsi points it would take to get them and then the jet and the points required to get it. The pamphlet that was found on the Cindy Crawford display said you could buy the rest of the points to get to a certain point level. And Pepsi seems to be guilty of some pretty sloppy contests in the past. All of this is to say, it seems obvious that Pepsi made a mistake they wished they hadn't and then refused to own up to it.
One of the things that I noticed the documentary didnt really touch on or rather, that it avoided, was what 'the kid' would do with the jet if he got it and why he wanted it. It WAS touched upon in several occasions but there didn't seem to be a final statement made by John about it. Probably intentional. The jet is worth a lot of money and it became fairly obvious he wouldn't be able to fly it if he procured it, so was his intent to acquire then sell it? From what I gleaned, it just seemed that his intent was that he merely wanted the jet, and hadn't thought too much past that, but for his friend to pony up $700K it would seem a given that at the end of the day, John sells the jet and makes away with a huge payout. One thing also not fully spoken about was if John eventually ended up getting anything from Pepsi and how his lawyers got paid for their work.
Regardless, this was an entertaining documentary. John's mother does come off as a bit of a conspiracy theorist but a doting mom, and those surrounding John (even to an extent, Michael, his lawyer) come off as people who really care for someone who was a good kid with intentions that were more technicality based than greed.
My take? He deserves that jet.