The complainant challenged whether the claim was misleading and could be substantiated. Hypnos responded by saying that the claim was pure hyperbole, and because it would not be interpreted literally it did not require objective substantiation.
Hypnos' argument asserted that the word "comfort" was an indefinite characteristic because it was a matter of personal preference – that comfort for one person would differ from what makes a comfortable bed for another person, which reinforced the company's belief that the claim was subjective. According to the ruling, Hypnos said "most comfortable" was its own opinion, and would therefore be seen as advertising "puffery" because the statement could not be empirically tested.
Furthermore, Hypnos asserted that the word "world" had a number of definitions – for example, the physical planet earth, the entire universe or the circumstances and experience of a particular person.
ASA did not uphold the complaint, stating: "The ASA considered that consumers would interpret the claim to refer to the comfort of a mattress and that the bed itself would be an important but secondary factor. We acknowledged that the experienced comfort of mattress types would vary between consumers due to features such as degree of firmness and the characteristics of manufacture, and that consumers would purchase a product based on their individual needs and preferences.
"Because mattress selection would vary between consumers it would be difficult to establish testing principles to objectively determine whether or not a bed was comfortable for consumers or in comparison with other manufacturers. We therefore concluded that because the claim was subjective, the ad was not misleading."