National Advertising Review Board Recommends Mint Mobile Discontinue or Modify Certain Claims for its Wireless Service

The advertising at issue had been challenged by Verizon Communications Inc. before the National Advertising Division (NAD). Following NAD’s decision (Case No. 7231), Mint Mobile appealed NAD’s recommendations.

Mint Mobile offers prepaid phone plans, which, unlike plans offered by Verizon and other major wireless carriers, require customers to pay upfront before receiving service.

The NARB panel determined that in connection with Mint Mobile’s advertised $15/mo. Promotional plan for its Unlimited service, it failed to consistently clearly and conspicuously disclose that consumers are required to prepay the entire $45 for three months of service. Accordingly, the panel recommended that it clearly and conspicuously disclose the required prepaid or upfront total cost of its plans across all advertising when promoting a plan with a cost-per-month price. The NARB panel did not agree with NAD’s recommendation that the disclosure must be part of the main claim or in a similar font as the main claim in order to be sufficiently conspicuous.

The NARB panel also recommended that Mint Mobile discontinue the claim that it “cut out the cost of retail service and passed those sweet savings directly to you” because it did not provide evidence demonstrating that it “passes along” any cost savings to consumers. The NARB panel noted that nothing in its decision precludes Mint Mobile from making truthful and non-misleading claims regarding its business model.

The NARB panel also concluded that Mint Mobile did not adequately support certain social media posts that utilized misleadingly disparaging phrases and recommended that it discontinue the claims:

• “Ver!zon Victim finally catching on to their shadiness.”
• “Ver!zon employee trying to convince you that paying for streaming services you used to get for free is a good thing.”
• “POV: “Ver!zon distracting us so we don’t realize they are now charging for perks.”
• “Ver!zon Victim, “Beware of the Bundlef*!”
• “What a Bundlef*! “Ver!zon’s ‘perks’ are now on you. Don’t let them stream you along.”

However, the NARB panel agreed with Mint Mobile that the phrases “#verizonsucks” and “Bundlef*!,” as standalone phrases, can be viewed as the advertiser’s opinion and puffery.

Mint Mobile stated that it would comply with the panel’s recommendations, although it disagrees with the panel’s recommendation regarding certain social media post claims. Mint Mobile also noted it appreciates the panel’s clarification that its disclosures of the total prepaid cost of its plans need not “be part of the main claim or in similar font as the main claim in order to be sufficiently conspicuous.” 

All BBB National Programs case decision summaries can be found in the case decision library. For the full text of NAD, NARB, and CARU decisions, subscribe to the online archive. Per NAD/NARB procedures, this release shall not be used for advertising or promotional purposes.