Remember When Pepsi Accidentally Offered a Fighter Jet for $700,000?
Most marketing missteps vanish as quickly as they appear. This one ended up in a federal courtroom, influenced advertising standards, and later inspired a Netflix documentary. In 1996, Pepsi aired a promotional commercial that became one of the most widely cited examples of a brand discovering that humor in advertising can have unexpected legal consequences.
The setup was a points-for-merchandise program called Pepsi Stuff. Customers could earn points from bottle labels and trade them in for hats, shirts, or jackets. The commercial introducing the campaign ended with a high school student landing a United States Marine Corps Harrier jump jet on campus, stepping out, and remarking that it beats taking the bus.
On the screen, the cost appears: 7,000,000 Pepsi Points. It was intended as a lighthearted gag, not a genuine redemption option. The issue was that nothing in the commercial clarified that the offer was fictional.
The Student Who Treated the Offer as Real
Image via Pexels/Quỳnh Lê Mạnh
John Leonard, a business student in Washington state, noticed two significant details in the official rules. First, the campaign allowed customers to purchase Pepsi Points for ten cents each. Second, nothing prevented someone from buying the full amount instead of collecting them through bottle labels.
Seven million points would therefore cost $700,000. A Harrier jump jet at the time was valued between $32 to $37 million. Leonard didn’t assume the discrepancy was a joke but a potential opportunity.
He raised the required money from a small group of investors, including entrepreneur Todd Hoffman, submitted the minimum number of Pepsi product labels, and enclosed a certified check for the remaining points. Then he waited for Pepsi to arrange delivery of the aircraft.
Pepsi declined the request immediately.
How It Turned Into a Court Case
Image via Canva/Giu
Pepsi argued that the Harrier was clearly meant as humor and filed a lawsuit asking the courts to declare Leonard’s claim invalid. Leonard responded with his own suit, accusing the company of breach of contract and fraud. The dispute eventually moved to federal court in Manhattan.
In 1999, Judge Kimba Wood issued a ruling that has since become a frequent example in advertising law courses. She wrote that no reasonable person could interpret the commercial as a serious offer of a Marine Corps fighter jet in a consumer merchandise program. She also noted that the teenager portrayed in the ad would be unlikely to operate any kind of military equipment.
The court ruled in Pepsi’s favor, thus ending Leonard’s attempt to claim the jet.
The High Cost of a Joke
Interest in the case surged again in 2022 with the release of Netflix’s documentary, Pepsi, Where’s My Jet?, which recounts Leonard’s efforts and his partnership with Hoffman. Their relationship added a personal dimension that many viewers found compelling.
Modern companies occasionally revisit the idea of dramatic promotional stunts involving aircraft. Liquid Death even referenced Leonard’s case directly in 2024 when it launched a giveaway for a real L-39 Albatros jet, framing the contest as the opposite of Pepsi’s misstep: if you win, the jet will actually be delivered.
The Legacy of the Jet That Never Arrived
Since the ruling, the case has served as a teaching tool for how courts determine reasonable interpretation in advertising. It also illustrates that consumers may take companies literally when brand messaging leaves room for ambiguity.
Leonard has since reflected on how convinced he once was that the offer might be genuine. Today, he views his younger self’s confidence as a mix of ambition and idealism. Still, he believes Pepsi missed a chance to turn the moment into a positive public-relations story during a period when the brand was marketing itself to the bold and adventurous “Pepsi Generation.”
Instead, the company approached the situation as a legal problem. As a result, Leonard’s attempt to claim a jet remains far more memorable than most of the campaign itself. It is one of the most unusual advertising stories ever recorded.