Flashback 1996: Man sues Pepsi to win Harrier Jet

The Pepsi promotional campaign was meant to entice people to buy Pepsi in exchange for points that could be redeemed for prizes. They ranged from sunglasses, to t-shirts, and even a Harrier Jet. But when a 21-year-old business student collected enough points for the jet, Pepsi was taken by surprise. John Blackstone explains what happened next in this 1996 "CBS Evening News" report.

[@jrdeckard3317]

Pepsi is like casinos. If you win, they never pay up.

[@mbh3929]

J R Deckard yea they’ll be like it’s a glitch in the system

[@GreenLittleRobot]

The fact that Pepsi changed the amount of tickets necessary after the lawsuit is kind of proof they are indeed advertising a jet.

[@petitio_principii]

Good they're not advertising a magical unicorn or a a T. rex, then.

[@deleted-something]

Yes

[@HoldMeBack]

The fact that Pepsi put a disclaimer that says "just kidding" after the new advertisement means people will believe in the tooth fairy regardless.

[@esho6460]

I’m more fascinated with how he casually raised $700,000 back in the 1990s as a 21 year old college kid.

[@CapriceInColor]

He found 5 investors to go in on it. A harrier jet is worth at least 50 million back then and potentially more. It wouldn’t be a bad investment if it paid off and if Pepsi refused, then you aren’t out your initial investment. If you like your odds in the legal battle and eventual settlement, it’s not the worst opportunity ever. Still, the kid probably had a difficult pitch, and the report doesn’t mention how many people he tried to talk to. He was in business school so he made have had some top tier contacts on deck.

[@jimcameron1234]

@@CapriceInColor No 33 Mio$ back in 1995

[@itsjemmabond]

Watch the Netflix documentary. All will be explained.

[@ThePeterDislikeShow]

it was the bitcoin of the 1990s.

[@Trabsol]

He got it from 5 different investors and though it didn’t work out. Pepsi ended up paying them 700k for the money they spent.

[@Davethe3rd]

See, I think Pepsi owes this man a jet. Or they at least owe him some compensation. See, yeah, it's obviously a joke, but they didn't put up a disclaimer, so they are saying that it could be won. What should have happened is they should have congratulated him, then told him, "We're sorry, it was a joke. We didn't think anyone would or even could actually collect that many Pepsi points! But, since you beat us at our own game, tell you what: We'll give you your money back, get you a tour of a real Harrier (not to keep) and give you whatever you want out of the other prizes. Deal?"

[@zutrue]

If they didn't put up a disclaimer, stating clearly that it was a joke, then legally pepsi was NOT joking!!! They were offering. He accepted and performed. See...elements of a contract.

[@icemachine79]

@@zutrue Nope, that's not how contract law works which is why the judge denied his claim. There was never a written contract between the two parties so his claim was frivolous.

[@zutrue]

@@icemachine79All contracts are not written. Verbal contracts have been successfully enforced have they not>?? And in addition, Pepsi was obviously in the wrong here.

[@icemachine79]

@@zutrue Contracts must be written when the amount of money or property involved is over a certain threshold. That's why Pepsi was able to put this obvious joke in their ad in the first place. They followed the law and were not in the wrong.

[@zutrue]

You among the many thing s I disagree with you on is the concept of an "obvious" joke. It wasn't a joke at all they just simply thought no one would rise to that standard. And that ASSUMTION as toppled many an ASSUMER. The "we was just kidding" school of thought don't cut it. @@icemachine79

[@vestel777]

It's called FALSE ADVERTISING!!!! if it was supposed to be a joke then Pepsi should have stated it in the commercial.

[@davidis3001]

Exactly sue them

[@araisannanoda3688]

Otherwise they could have made an April Fool joke

[@gavrielmusheyev141]

@@davidis3001 he did sue, but the judge favored in Pepsi

[@excessiveteam_com5387]

@@gavrielmusheyev141 the judge that got paid very well

[@petitio_principii]

Yeah, just like how doll companies' ads have small letters saying the dolls are not like real mini humans/fairies that walk around for real. Otherwise how could one imagine otherwise?

[@crazybrit-nasafan]

They advertised it and there was nothing in the ad that said it was a joke. Looks legally binding to me. In my honest opinion it looks like Pepsi owe the guy a Harrier.

[@spee2000]

Nope, but you can read the appeal case yourself! look up Leonard v. Pepsico

[@Christianwhyallhandlestaken]

@@spee2000 scram bozo

[@jourdan9504]

@@spee2000 the judge was bought by Pepsi. No jury. No key witnesses questioned. If Pepsi is in the right then I'm going to run a fake lottery ads all over the television and the internet and just keep everyones money because it was obviously a joke. I just wanted you to buy a ticket and now that you did I'm not going to pay you even tho I said I would because once again me paying you was the joke.

[@hasan_z]

​@@spee2000 pepsi has a history of running acam contests. They should be banned

[@imthefuckinglizardking4590]

If this case went to court today he'd get that jet no problem.

[@yugalysk3395]

Exactly

[@Jr-bn7kc]

I guess the jury cared more about a soulless billion dollar company strange huh

[@guillermomataserrano9413]

Indeed 😂

[@stigidanto8320]

@@Jr-bn7kc it never made it to jury cus corporations and laws arent trustworthy

[@randyogle7051]

That was the problem it never went in front of a jury the judge stoped all of it

[@IkeThe9th]

Pretty Simple: Give Leonard his jet and completely remove the ad - Or - Return Leonard's money that he spent buying Pepsi labels and completely remove the ad. Pepsi could have said, "Sorry, we have no Harriers to give" and offered him a car, a house, or a lifetime supply of Pepsi. Instead Pepsi sued him, insulted him, and doubled down on the ad. Glad I drink Coca Cola.

[@icemachine79]

They _did_ return the money. But Leonard doesn't deserve anything for trying to game the system. The jet was an obvious joke.

[@icemachine79]

@Eugene Crabs08 No, it's like getting upset when someone takes all your money because you were stupid enough to believe their story about depositing it in a bank on the Moon where it would be "safe".

[@tomatoface12]

I don't think Coca Cola has the moral high ground here

[@karasu1982]

@@tomatoface12 they do so long as you're the less white amount they want.

[@Kuhekin]

@@icemachine79 doesn’t deserve? 2 years late but he did pointed out there is a loophole in that Pepsis commercial right?

[@corric6592]

I'm doing a law assignment for this case

[@johntheprofessional5039]

Pepsi didn’t learn its lesson from its debacle in the Philippines a few years earlier. Pepsi promised millions dollar jackpot prize if a drinker found a winning number under the bottle cap. But Pepsi accidentally printed thousands of bottle caps with the winning number. That resulted in anger, rage and deadly riots.

[@spee2000]

Unilateral mistake, and not on the part of Pepsi I am thinking, but their suppliers. Interesting stuff!

[@klausstock8020]

​@@spee2000 They had just forgotten that bottles from a previous campaign had the winning number. Some 800,000 bottles. The prize was 1M pesos, not $1M, but still. Sounds vaguely familiar? Yep, McDonalds had also once forgotten that there still Monopoly stickers around from the previous year. Printing a clearly visible expiration date on caps or stickers could have prevented these issues. But I guess if you manage such big companies, clever thinking is not one of the requirements for the job.

[@pizzainc.1465]

1 million Philippine pesos, to be more accurate. That’s only about 40,000 dollars, and I’m sure they could pay that easily

[@zr71offroad20]

They say you can win a Jet, they better give you what they promised.

[@Astinsan]

It’s not a joke when other parts of the ad are real. I don’t get his “joke”.

[@Milesco]

Well, one could make the argument that the "real" part of the ad was the setup of the joke, and the Harrier jet fighter was the punch line. But if they'd been smart, they would've made the number of points much larger. Not only would that help to protect them from a breach of contract claim (making the jet too expensive to acquire under any circumstances), it would be funnier as well. 700,000,000 is a laughably large number of points to have to collect in order to claim the Harrier.

[@theredneckfaithful4759]

PepsiCo is a joke

[@Razgriz85]

Still not as bad as their 92 sweepstakes that had the people in the Philippines literally declaring war on them.

[@NewJerseyJay]

He lost the case, and got nothing in 1996. Sounds like Pepsi bought themselves a Judge!!

[@UmamiPapi]

"Justice" system.

[@katobrucelee08]

@@UmamiPapi "just ice" exactly how I like my pepsi

[@thehunterofdeath2180]

That it

[@ThePeterDislikeShow]

Come on, give it to him and make it a publicity stunt. Bet they would have made far more doing it that way.

[@erikerice9068]

If it was in a damn commercial, without the disclaimer, that's Pepsi's fault. He was smarter than them. Pretty slick if you really think about it.

[@marco3dartist]

This wasn't the only time Pepsi lied. Later they claimed to give hundreds of thousands of people 40k and never send it out.

[@Texan2525]

If Pepsi can afford 17 old submarines, 1 Friget, 1 Cruiser and Destroyer to make pepsi the 6th largest submarine fleet in the world at the time then surely could afford the Harrier. If not sell more Pepsi to the Russians for a Sukhoi Su-27 for the guy

[@philipmcgee5202]

One more reason I rarely drink Pepsi.

[@monicaevie4152]

nunchaku101 that’s just an urban legend, it’s not true

[@billcipher7292]

one time i drank pepsi and it was watered down. I rarely drink it now.

[@pizzainc.1465]

Same with me! I put ice in it, but they ice disappeared, the water level increased, and it tasted watered down!

[@pizzainc.1465]

How could they steal my ice?!?!

[@sax003]

They should've sent him the prop from the commercial.

[@CriticalPoliticalThinking]

It wasn’t a prop but they never said size … hot wheel perhaps

[@clipobserver]

Pepsi Sued FIRST not Leonard. Pepsi really dropped the ball multiple times with this. Offering two coupons instead of one of everything in that damn catalog though he was offered a million dollars later on. They got lucky the judge was on their side. Also, Coke should have reached out to Leonard during this time (he did in the Netflix miniseries that Coke was better than Pepsi).

[@bmla88]

Coke should’ve done a rebuttal as where he rides in a harrier jet.

[@randyogle7051]

Lol now thats a good idea

[@closinginonclosure]

I remember the Pepsi points as a kid. I was 10. Me and a friend would get on our bikes and pass recycling bins on the curb looking for empty 12 and 24 packs or any plastic bottle labels. Haven't thought of that in years.

[@e13kid]

🤣🤣

[@azozyhd3166]

yeah yeah yeah yeah yeah bunch of lies and made up memories to attire attention blah blah blah unbelievable learn how to lie

[@ThatLadyInDallas2024]

Did you and your friend think the jet was really part of the 'prizes'?

[@closinginonclosure]

@@ThatLadyInDallas2024 Haha. No, neither of us thought that or were after the jet.

[@st.jimmy0244]

True, he was just another guy trying to exploit a loophole, but give him credit for coming up with it at least. I wonder how no one at Pepsi ever did the real simple math themselves."Hey guys, not for nothing, but maybe instead of 7,000,000 we should make it an unreasonable number, especially since you can just buy them?"Simple solution: since it's a joke they should have offered it for something that doesn't exist (4 zillion points, 3 gajillion points, whatever)

[@WhyDoIKeepFuckinUp]

I can’t believe nobody at Pepsi said “we should make it a way higher number, so it’s impossible.”

[@alexandrajohn2378]

@@WhyDoIKeepFuckinUp we’ll actually in the documentary that just came out they got the people that made the commercial, turns out the higher ups they pitched it to at Pepsi said they should lower the number because it uses to be ridiculous high for the joke but they said to lower it because what if someone wants to know how much it cost and quote, but of course that wasn’t released till today and there’s not much you can do about that.

[@joenichols3901]

Lmao the kid saying "Well if he drank that much Pepsi I think he should get it"

[@madcommodore]

Someone at Pepsi got their sums wrong, it should always have been more than 10 times the cost of a brand new Harrier lol

[@johnnyfavorite1194]

Frivolous ain’t Somebody who puts $700,000 where his mouth is.

[@Ram2x]

So how is someone supposed to know it was a joke?

[@christopherb4015]

What do you mean Red Bull won't actually give me wings?. .How dare you say that then.

[@YouCanCallMeReTro]

Love how salty about it the pepsi guy is

[@WhyDoIKeepFuckinUp]

He’s a punk

[@tackywhale5664]

I was shown this in civil law class in high school.

[@EvieBoleynLyon]

Where's my elephant? Where's my elephant? Where's my elephant?

[@medya2]

They should give it to him, or they will be considered as scammers.

[@I_WANT_MY_SLAW]

They should've sent him a model of a jet, since they never specified that it was a real jet. Or better yet, give him the prop jet they used in the commercial.

[@NoNameNoWhere]

That would have been pretty funny.

[@bradburykalinchak3744]

in the documentary they said they thought about but the commercial says a harrior jet not a model of a harrior jet

[@NoNameNoWhere]

@@bradburykalinchak3744 Well, it was clearly a joke, so they really didn't owe him anything.

[@m_e_nere]

@@NoNameNoWhere he spent 700,000. They at least owe him that

[@NoNameNoWhere]

@@m_e_nere He mailed Pepsi a $700,000 check and 15 points. Pepsi mailed the check back to him. They never took his money.

[@corric6592]

This is my essay on this case for school. I believe that 21 year old John should when his lawsuit against Pepsi because the Pepsi company falsely advertised a harrier fighter jet to get customers intrested in their product if the Pepsi company would have put some sort of disclaimer on the commercial this whole entire lawsuit could have been avoided together also if John the plaintiff had still to side did to Sue the Pepsi company after seeing a disclaimer though is similar to or had been along the lines of dread is not available for purchase he would have had a very low chance to win his case against Pepsi although the Pepsi company had advertised and unattainable goal for 7 million Pepsi points the Pepsi company still made it possible to gain access to all the advertised prices by allowing customers to pay money instead of earning the amount of Pepsi points necessary for the items the company rules said the customers could pay 10 cents per every one point instead of buying Pepsi products to gain Pepsi points because the Pepsi company had that as 1 of the rules it influenced the customers into believing that they could actually buy or earn the harrier fighter jet and receive it to John saw the Pepsi commercial and was intrested in the harrier fighter jet that was in the video he was 1 of the people that were influencing the thinking him he would be able to get his jet from the pets Pepsi company pepsi's commercial although very fun and humorous it lacks the proper disclaimer to inform the public on non reality of pepsi's advertisement that included a harrier fighter jet.

[@luispereira7983]

after seen this i wont buy any pepsi anymore until the guy gets his jet

[@TFSyndicate]

WHERE'S MY ELEPHANT....i mean HARRIER JET?!?!?

[@zudemaster]

I would like to know how this turned out. One thing to consider though, i don't even think Pespi could buy a Harrier Jet. Its not just the money, its the fact that most military Jets are really not sold to the public. And even if they would have given him the jet exactly what could he do with it? He can't fly it. The storage and maintenance costs alone would be insane.

[@e13kid]

From what I understand they returned the money and he was awarded no damages.

[@Mirdax]

If he gets the jet, He would just probably sell it for full price

[@michaelsmulkowski746]

He wouldn’t need an airfield since the Harrier can take of vertically.

[@sscoconut1265]

owe this man a jet pepsi

[@nczioox1116]

Pepsi raising the points tells you they are hoping people think its real. they could've easily put some fine print in there saying its just an ad promotion

[@WhyDoIKeepFuckinUp]

Or made the number way higher than that, so it was literally impossible.

[@fireflymiesumae]

he should've at least sued for false advertising.

[@ricktherockandroller]

Well just watched the Netflix show and no more Pepsi for me.

[@rickd3777]

this is a pretty classic ad, I wanted to restore it into 1080p, but HOW?

[@jasonluong3862]

Remember the ad where it claims you can get a car for some bananas. Someone took that claim literally. Hilarity ensued.

[@twistedyogert]

0:07 1450 to look like a Terminator?

[@rickd3777]

OK it might be understandable that they can't sell the jet but Pepsi didn't even give John a PENNY!

[@hammerdragon4321]

I remember this when this guy thought that he would have actually got a jump jet that cost millions of dollars

[@alexkuhn5078]

we are a litigious society. Pepsi of all entities ought to know that.

[@seanpecenka5282]

They should have at least given him a RC or a cool modle of the jet that's bull

[@Razgriz85]

Or flight tours equivalent to the amount he paid.

[@JaradsWRLD]

Why not give him a legal and slightly cheaper jet? John was robbed

[@KolPlays]

Wait so, red bull can get sued and loses and or settles for advertising the product gives you wings, but pepsi says if you give them so many points they give you in this instance a jet. How did pepsi not lose?

[@grantezell9497]

PepsiCo is a lot more powerful with friends in high places. Judge Wood works for corporations and didn’t include a jury or testimonies. It’s corrupt and BS.

[@randyogle7051]

Disclosure this is why they have them now lol

[@EnhanceRaptor]

I knew this was a joke back when I was 12 watching this commercial for the first time. If John Leonard's still interested in Harriers he should try meeting up with Art Nalls, who does fly a civilian owned Sea Harrier.

[@phantasm3207]

They put a disclaimer in the Canada Ad but not the US one... such BS

[@jourdan9504]

You can legally own a harrier as long as it's not outfitted for war.

[@orlenahart3966]

what happened in this case? Does anyone know?

[@DiamondGB]

Sums up why there was no Pepsi generation. If their marketing department had any wits they would have armed their fanbase with more than jets, but also a standing military and WOMD. We'd be tweeting from Pepsistan, not America.

[@brookechandler6265]

so for 70 mil would they give you the jet then or say its a joke again seems like a scam

[@MasterOfDickery]

I want my elephant!

[@---cx1ly]

What is that kiosk he's messing with at :27 ? anybody know?

[@ThatOneGuyFromSchool]

He's an American hero 🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸

[@WhyDoIKeepFuckinUp]

He’s probably rich nowadays anyway. He’s smart.

[@ItsToXxy]

Pepsi marketing wasn't smart enough to use a disclaimer and then say it's a joke, but they still advertise it by raising the points. Idiots lol.

[@NoNameNoWhere]

How is that stupid? They raised the points so the jet became vastly more expensive than it actually was.

[@EasyPeasy_Japanesey]

@@NoNameNoWhere It's stupid cuz Pepsi didn't learn their lesson the first time.

[@NoNameNoWhere]

@@EasyPeasy_Japanesey What lesson? 700,000,000 points is $700 million. The fighter jet was worth $23 million. How did they not learn their lesson? How is that stupid?

[@DThornDigital]

Where is this guy now ⁉️🤔💭

[@MrRobot1984]

I remember this but never heard of the kid won his lawsuit?

[@Chuva3000]

I will never drink another pepsi.

[@mjwatts1983]

1. Saw the Netflix document trailer 2. Where’s my elephant?

[@oldbaldfatman2766]

So, what happened with kids lawsuit?

[@icemachine79]

It got thrown out for being incredibly stupid.

[@waparedess]

Shame on Judge Kimba Maureen Wood... who dismiss John Leonard Legal Action even with all proof for what he sued Pepsi, but at the end Judge gave the win verdict to Pepsi ...

[@wildbat9098]

if it was just a joke why did they raise the points to 700 million?😂 So you'd be paying for a legit jet at that point

[@snipamontage6222]

How is see it, with basic elements of a contract. Pepsi made an offer at large. Without a disclaimer showing it to be a joke or a mere advertisement. Term states, get 7M points and claim a Harrier. John arranges 7M point. This is acceptance. This becomes an agreement. Assuming owing a non military version of a Harrier is legal. This agreement is a contract. Pepsi owed this gentleman a Harrier, or compensation for the injury caused.

[@spee2000]

Only the commercial made this "offer", and it would have been seen as an advertisement (not usually a contract). Leonard could not agree to this "offer" because it wasn't a legal offer. It was a joke and a reasonable person would view it as such. From a public policy perspective, we have to allow creative advertisement.

[@NoNameNoWhere]

Commercials are not binding contracts. False advertising and contractual obligation are two different things. Therefore, Pepsi never entered a contract with Leonard. In advertising, you are allowed to make jokes. Since we know a teenager can not fly a fighter jet to school and it's unfeasible for anyone to actually obtain 700,000 points, we can reasonably conclude that it's a joke. Jokes, allowed in commercials, are not allowed in contracts unless they are to be taken seriously. The advertisement also stated that Pepso was handing out a magazine that listed all the rewards (it also listed instructions on how to claim them). This means Leonard would have had the terms and conditions listed for him there, not the advertisement.

[@agent_pilot6723]

“Who is here from law school?”

[@Bobo-ym1df]

U can go to a boneyard and find a harrier jet

[@alexkastano96]

they had a better lawyers

[@spee2000]

The appeals court agreed, tho.

[@JeriDro]

This reminds of those online sport betting websites. If too many people win, they don't pay out.

[@thomascollins4325]

Always been a Coke man myself. Pepsi is way too sweet for me. I like how this thing blew up.

[@JoshuaWise1994]

He should've gotten the jet! With the ruling we got, we now live in a world where there's apparently nothing wrong with false advertising.

[@randyogle7051]

That's is because no one cares anymore

[@SixFoenem]

Pepsi gives you wings.

[@oscartobaroatmeal6734]

Daaaaamn... He was suppose to have the Harrier

[@whtbobwntsbobget]

Anyone else's back hurt looking at his posture?

[@EdwinDPZ]

If it was a joke why did they raise the point requirement?

[@WhyDoIKeepFuckinUp]

Exactly

[@mamoruchiba3301]

Give this man a jet pepsi.

[@jimcameron1234]

And I am still waiting for my Space Shuttle still not delivered

[@rockoneinamillion9427]

Good for him

[@Am-xforce]

I remember this and I was mad Pepsi lied. I never bother collecting points from them on anything after that.

[@araisannanoda3688]

Did they mention that they once receive submarines as payment from the Soviet generals for Pepsi?

[@richardterroni9433]

The crazy thing is that even if they had offered the jet he would have still had to pay around $10 Million in prize taxes.

[@alfiovillordo350]

It would have still been profitable, as the jet costs around 30 million

[@kajjez]

Doesn't it vary by state?

[@richardterroni9433]

@@kajjez For state taxes yes but there is always federal taxes

[@ashbyashby2616]

Netflix bought you here too!!!🤣

[@futureshock7425]

that was no joke bro

[@derangius]

That last ad guy at the end is rhe ad fuy you want to hire. Put the guy in the Harrier, give him a country wide tour and turn it into an ad. What a missed opportunity by Pepsi

[@chezzz._.]

700,000,000 is too overpriced for a harrier jump jet because it costs about 4 million dollars and 70 million dollars is about 17 jets so for 700 million points that’s over priced think about moving it to 40 million👍🏻 if u don’t wanna lie to ur customers

[@fabianoperes2155]

Fake advertize should be punished. He deserves the jet.

[@anubis20049999]

Leonard looks like Vanilla Ice. No lie.

[@RealistDryad]

Imagine if you can actually win it.

[@hpa2005]

Honestly: this ad is from a time when people didn't have to be told that it was a joke and knew that Pepsi wasn't going to give away a major piece of military hardware to teenager with no training in how to use it.

[@NoNameNoWhere]

But... Pepsi is an evil corporation, and are thus guilty by default! /sarcasm The amount of support Leonard is getting is sickening. It's made even worse with the insanely dishonest documentary that was released.

[@randyogle7051]

No Brandon what's sickening is that corporations like Pepsi are allowed to get away with this and then do a documentary on it and laugh about winning a case that Knowing they should have lost and would have if it went in front of a jury

[@JonathanMoosey]

Even if Pepsi was able to give John Leonard a Harrier jet, his lack of skill to fly the jet would make him ineligible to receive the prize just as if a car was being given away in a contest would require the person entering the contest for said car would have a have a valid drivers license. So therefore Pepsi did not commit fraud of any kind. Of course I’m sure that companies nowadays are much more careful on their advertisements

[@iminatx3879]

Disagree. You don't need a pilot's license to own an airplane any more than you need a driver's license to own a car, you just can't fly/drive it if you don't. And it should be possible in principle to remove the militarized components of a Harrier jet before delivering (this is done with retired military aircraft all the time). Had Pepsi delivered the jet, there would be no problem with Leonard owning it long enough to flip to a pilot or collector.

[@philcenters6690]

Did he get the jet? How did it end legally?

[@WhyDoIKeepFuckinUp]

No, he didn’t.

[@smcneal057]

Part of me thinks he knew it was a joke, but he did it to prove a point.

[@NoNameNoWhere]

He knew it was a joke, but figured the lack of disclaimer was a loophole. So instead of suing the company for doing something wrong, he sued the company for a potential oversight. In other words, he was just trying to get rich.

[@djcrazy2685]

it actually said a jet, not a picture of a jet, a model of a jet or a ride in a jet!!

[@ericwright2936]

DID HE GET HIS'S JET!

[@PANZERFAUST90]

his*

[@bmoulas]

Pepsi said it best, but he's taking advantage of stupidity.

[@davidis3001]

Did he get it should have

[@larrysargent4001]

Lol just FYI he did not get the plane. Your info is incorrect