• Connect
  • Bookmark Us
  • AF Twitter
  • AF YouTube
  • AF LinkedIn
  • Subscribe
  • Subscription Link
Arent Fox
  • Firm

    • History

    • Awards & Recognitions

    • Diversity

      • Overview
      • Diversity Scholarship
      • Employees on Diversity
      • LGBT Initiative
      • Women’s Leadership Development Initiative
    • Alumni

    • Pro Bono

      • Overview
      • Current Pro Bono Work
      • Community Involvement
      • Pro Bono Newsletter
      • Pro Bono Awards & Honors
      • FAQ: Pro Bono & Working at Arent Fox
    • Leadership

      • Firm Management
      • Administrative Leadership
  • Deals & Cases

  • People

  • Practices & Industries

    • Practices

      • Advertising, Promotions & Data Security
      • Government Relations
      • Antitrust & Competition Law
      • Health Care
      • Appellate
      • Insurance & Reinsurance
      • Bankruptcy & Financial Restructuring
      • Intellectual Property
      • Commercial Litigation
      • International Trade
      • Communications, Technology & Mobile
      • Labor & Employment
      • Construction
      • Municipal & Project Finance
      • Consumer Product Safety
      • OSHA
      • Corporate & Securities
      • Political Law
      • ERISA
      • Real Estate
      • Environmental
      • Tax
      • FDA Practice (Food & Drug)
      • Wealth Planning & Management
      • Finance
      • White Collar & Investigations
      • Government Contractor Services
    • Industries

      • Automotive
      • Energy Law & Policy
      • Fashion, Luxury Goods & Retail
      • Government Real Estate & Public Buildings
      • Hospitality
      • Life Sciences
      • Long Term Care & Senior Living
      • Media & Entertainment
      • Medical Devices
      • Nonprofit
      • Sports
  • Newsroom

    • Alerts

    • Events

    • Media Mentions

    • Press Releases

    • Social Media

    • Subscribe

  • Careers

    • Lawyers

    • Law Students

    • Professional Staff

  • Contact

    • Washington, DC

    • New York, NY

    • Los Angeles, CA

    Alerts

    • Newsroom Overview
      • Alerts

        Alerts by Criteria

        E.g., 1 / 21 / 2013
        E.g., 1 / 21 / 2013
      • Events
      • Media Mentions
      • Press Releases
      • Social Media
      • Subscribe

    You are here

    Home » Newsroom » Alerts

    Share

    • Printer-friendly version
    • Send by email
    • A Title
    • A Title
    • A Title
    • A
    • A
    • A

    What Are Advertisers Up To? FTC Examines Consumer Interpretation Of "Up To" Claims

    June 29, 2012

    The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has released a study finding that many consumers interpret advertising claims containing the phrase “up to” to mean that they will achieve the specified maximum results. The full study can be downloaded to the right of this article. The FTC-commissioned study compared consumers’ perception of advertisements for new windows that all contained savings claims. Each of the three advertisements contained one of the following claims:

    • “Proven to Save Up to 47% on Your Heating and Cooling Bills!”
    • “Proven to Save 47% on Your Heating and Cooling Bills!”
    • “Proven to Save Up to 47%* on Your Heating and Cooling Bills!” The asterisk pointed to a disclosure stating “The average Bristol Windows owner saves about 25% on heating and cooling bills.”

    The study asked consumers a number of questions related to their interpretation of the advertisements. The study found that between 36 percent and 45.6 percent of consumers who viewed the advertisement containing the “Proven to Save Up to 47% on Your Heating and Cooling Bills!” claim believed that the advertisement stated or implied savings of 47 percent on heating and cooling bills. These individuals did not mention the “up to” portion of the claim in their responses.

    Consumers who viewed the advertisement without the “up to” language had similar interpretations of their advertisements. The researchers concluded that the inclusion of the “up to” language did not counteract consumers’ interpretation of the claims. In other words, a significant number of consumers interpret claims with the “up to” language the same way that they interpret an identical advertisement that lacks the “up to” language. Therefore, these consumers are likely to believe that they can achieve the maximum savings highlighted within the advertisement. The FTC has stated that this study reinforces its view that advertisers making “up to” claims should be able to substantiate that consumers are likely to achieve the maximum results promised under normal circumstances.

    Arent Fox is monitoring developments at the FTC and encourages all advertisers making claims involving “up to” qualifiers to seek legal counsel prior to making the claims. Please contact Sarah Bruno or Matthew Mills with questions.

    Related People

    • Sarah L. Bruno
    • Matthew R. Mills

    Related Practices

    Advertising, Promotions & Data Security

    Downloads

    • Effects of a Bristol Windows Advertisement
    • Firm
    • Deals & Cases
    • People
    • Practices & Industries
    • Newsroom
    • Careers
    • Contact

    Footer Main

    • Firm
    • Deals & Cases
    • People
    • Practices & Industries
    • Newsroom
    • Careers
    • Subscribe
    • Alumni
    • Diversity
    • Legal Notice
    • Privacy Policy
    • Social Media Disclaimer
    • Nondiscrimination
    • Site Map
    • Client/Staff Login

    Offices

    • Washington, DC
      1717 K Street, NW
      Washington, DC 20036
      Tel: 202.857.6000
    • New York, NY
      1675 Broadway
      New York, New York 10019
      Tel: 212.484.3900
    • Los Angeles, CA
      555 West Fifth Street, 48th Floor
      Los Angeles, California 90013
      Tel: 213.629.7400
    • © Copyright 2013 Arent Fox LLP. All Rights Reserved.

      Legal Disclaimer
      Contents may contain attorney advertising under the laws of some states. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.