- The ARB rejected new substantiation for the “Mzansi’s fave pizza” claim.
- No SAMRA-accredited entity confirmed the claim as accurate.
- The previous ruling stands, and the claim must remain withdrawn.
The Advertising Regulatory Board has once again ruled against Famous Brands Management Company, finding that its latest attempt to justify Debonairs Pizza’s claim to be the “home of Mzansi’s fave pizza” still falls short of the Code of Advertising Practice.
Despite submitting new research material and proof of SAMRA affiliation, the regulator found that the core requirement, independent verification of the claim, remained unmet.
The dispute was brought by Roman’s Pizza Pretoria Pty Ltd, which challenged the claim as misleading and unsubstantiated.
The matter returned to the ARB following an earlier ruling in December 2025, in which the Directorate had already found that the advertiser failed to provide adequate evidence in support of its claim.
What Famous Brands submitted
In response to the initial ruling, Famous Brands put forward a range of documents in an effort to address the deficiency. These included survey data in the form of an Excel spreadsheet reflecting City Press Readers’ Choice results, a Daily Sun campaign proposal outlining audience demographics, and research material from Plus 94 Research.
The advertiser also submitted proof that Plus 94 Research holds membership with the South African Marketing Research Association, along with certification of a SAMRA-accredited researcher.
Famous Brands argued that, taken together, these documents addressed the ARB’s concerns and demonstrated that its claim was properly substantiated, and that the earlier ruling should therefore be overturned.
Roman’s Pizza, represented by Savage Jooste and Adams Attorneys, pushed back. It maintained that the advertiser still had not met the requirements of the Code, arguing that proving SAMRA membership is simply not enough. What the Code actually requires is a clear, direct confirmation from a SAMRA-accredited entity that the specific advertising claim is true.
What the tribunal found
The Directorate sided with the complainant, finding that the fundamental problem remained unresolved. While it accepted that Plus 94 Research is SAMRA-accredited, it noted that the company had not actually confirmed that Debonairs is, in fact, “Mzansi’s fave pizza.”
Looking more closely at the research, the Directorate found that one of the documents placed Debonairs among the top six fast food brands in South Africa by average consumer spend. But it was quick to point out that spending levels and consumer preferences are not the same thing.
As the ARB explained, a brand could rank highly on spend simply because its products are more expensive, not because customers prefer it.
On the flip side, consumers might actually prefer a pricier competitor but choose a more affordable option out of necessity. These are exactly the kinds of interpretive gaps that require expert input to bridge.
The Directorate was clear on what was needed, stating that “the accuracy of the claims based on the survey must be confirmed by a SAMRA Accredited Marketing Researcher or an entity acceptable to the Southern African Marketing Research Association.”
The City Press Readers’ Choice data was also considered but ultimately found to be inconclusive without independent verification of its accuracy, relevance, and currency.
The outcome
Without explicit confirmation from a SAMRA-accredited entity that the claim is true, the ARB found that Famous Brands had still not complied with Clause 4.1 of Section II of the Code.
The claim was deemed “not adequately substantiated,” and the previous ruling was confirmed as binding. Debonairs Pizza may not use the phrase “home of Mzansi’s fave pizza” in its advertising.
Get your news on the go. Click here to follow the Conviction WhatsApp channel.
