⚖️

The Pepsi Number Fever Disaster

Apr 26, 2025

Pepsi's Number Fever Disaster in the Philippines (1992)

Contest Overview

  • Name of Contest: Number Fever
  • Concept: A daily winning number was announced on the news.
    • If you had a Pepsi bottle cap with that number, you won a million pesos.
  • Popularity: Highly popular, with half of the Philippines' population participating.
  • Prize Value: A million pesos was life-changing for the average Filipino.

Initial Execution

  • Pepsi’s Control: Controlled winners via a computer program.
    • Program seeded two winning caps per bottling plant.
    • Objective: Maintain a limited number of winners to stay within budget.

Catastrophic Glitch

  • Extension: Contest extended by 5 weeks due to popularity.
  • Error on May 25, 1992: Winning number "349" announced.
    • 349 was a non-winning number; bottling plants freely printed it.
    • Result: Over 600,000 winning caps were in circulation.

Aftermath of the Error

  • Public Reaction: Wild celebrations and rush to claim prizes.
  • Pepsi's Response:
    • Offered 500 pesos per winning cap (0.5% of original prize).
    • Blamed computer glitch; refused to honor full prize.
  • Public Outrage: Led to protests and riots, resulting in 5 deaths and numerous injuries.

Organized Legal Action

  • Coalition 349: Legal action group formed by winners.
    • Led by preacher Del Fiero.
    • Aim: Sue Pepsi for $400 million.

Allegations and Legal Proceedings

  • Rumors: Accusations that Pepsi bombed their own trucks to frame Coalition 349.
    • Testimonies claimed Pepsi hired mercenaries.
    • Pepsi denied these accusations.
  • Legal Outcome:
    • Arrest warrants issued for nine Pepsi executives.
    • Most lawsuits were eventually dismissed.
    • In 2006, court ruled Pepsi not negligent; issued a 150,000 pesos fine.

Lasting Impact

  • Cultural Memory:
    • Traumatized many Filipinos.
    • Mentioning "Pepsi" is frowned upon in certain groups.
  • Pepsi's Statement:
    • Acknowledged the events are over 30 years old.
    • Expressed regret but mentioned no current executives were involved.