Question 22 10 pts PepsiCo has an advertisement that shows a 14-year-old boy who is drinking lots of Pepsi at his home while he is late for school. The narrator states that you get Pepsi Rewards Points for every can you buy. The commercial then ips to a catalog with prizes you get such as free Pepsi hats, T-shirts, and tote bags. You see dirt ying and a huge wind gust because a Harrier Jet is landing in the school. The cockpit opens and you see the 14-year-old boy take off his "Top Gun\" sunglasses and gets out of the HarrierJet and goes to school. Then superimposed on the screen, you see in red letters "7,000,000\" points. The commercial ends. Pete \"Maverick\" Mitchell sees the ad on television. He spends about $300,000 on Pepsi in order to get 7,000,000 points. Once he does, he presents them to Pepsico and says that he wants his Harrier Jet which retails for approximately $33.8 million. Pepsico says no because no contract was formed. Mr. Mitchell sues Pepsico for breach of contract. Who will win the lawsuit? (3 points). What is the legal theory other than statute of frauds, that the winner will use? Please explain this theory in detail. [7 points)