That totally depends. Are you a shithead? Then my reliance is not reasonable. Did I help you cheat on your LSAT and law exams? Then, again, no. Are you a priest? That certainly helps. Just go through the elements of promissory estoppel, and remember (in every K situation) the capacities and capabilities or the parties that they possess independently or because of prior relationships, and other shit.
I think without more facts that would warrant "reasonable reliance" this sounds like a promise of a gift, which is jackshit.
I had to look up the Restatement. It says:
(2) An offer which the offeror should reasonably expect to induce action or forbearance of a substantial character on the part of the offeree before acceptance and which does induce such action or forbearance is binding as an option contract to the extent necessary to avoid injustice.
My take: no.
Got ya. Essentially I was just trying to make sure I'm applying the right doctrine to the right type of situation. I know that it may not be found to be justifiable reliance etc. So in that sense I have it down right?