A common consumer concern is that retailers will not stand behind the promises they make in advertisements. Should Pepsi have been required to provide the promised prize in this contest (or the financial equivalent) or should the customer (John Leonard) have known that it was an example of "puffery" and that winning a Harrier Jet was not a realistic prize option? How should a court resolve a matter like this, what should Pepsi's obligations be, and what if anything should John Leonard have received for his trouble?