Implicit claim would be the bowflex commercial showing a buff person using their product. They are not showing lines on some dude they drew themselves claiming muscle growth etc. its just some buff person working out with their stuff. The Ellusionist ad is making an explicit claim (up to a point...)with their line drawing, the implicit claim they could have made would be just the decks near each other with no lines added to show the difference. Just for a comparison Subway was sued for their footlongs not measuring up to 12 inches. The issue was Subway made an explicit claim of length and they tried to weasel around that by saying things like its just a trademarked name, "Subway footlong", claiming it didn't mean their sandwiches were a certain size. Had they just said Sub sammich instead of footlong they would be fine with their 10-12 in sammiches. Now Ellusionist didn't make any claims of specific thinness but implied it to be far more than it is with their addition of the lines. They are probably fine legally because they didn't say something like 20 cards thinner than the other deck but that was implied for sure with the lines they added for the false comparison. Its kind of like a life insurance commercial showing a graph where they messed with the x y axis to imply larger growth over time than really happens. They didn't make a specific claim but they implied it a bit underhandedly, these actions go further than the bowflex comparison. These actions certainly reflect on them as a company, I'm getting rambly here so will be trying to keep with the food comparison... Does the burger on a menu look like what you get when you order it? In fast food or bad restaurants not really, those food pictures are doctored beyond the average food pictures to give the product a better appeal. Slightly higher end restaurants (like red robin etc) will have their food looking reasonably close to whats pictured. Nicer restaurants really don't have pics on their menus but when you get the food its usually fit for pictures. Ellusionist seemed to take a fast food approach to advertising this product plus a little extra due to their false comparison with the lines they drew. I think a higher end approach would have been fine with this product because people in the know will appreciate the thinness of that deck. I think because the product is fine most people are apt to overlook the deceptive advertising. Personally most of Ellusionist advertising isn't my bag, I'm probably not their target audience, but I do own some of their products and find them to be generally fine.