[BillyCoxDodgers3B]

I'm wondering what they found. Laser printer copy, maybe? Signatures seem strangely washed out, but a poor scan could be to blame.

It may be either here nor there, but you have what appears to be a slightly more vintage Berra autograph paired with a modern Mantle. Ink shades do differ between them, yet both look similarly washed out. That shouldn't be. If they were signed years apart as indicated by signature styles, they would normally have aged more separately from one another on that same piece of paper.

If this is your standard FDC-sized envelope, I also find the autographs a touch diminutive for my taste. Mick would tend to sign these a bit larger unless there were already more players crowding the piece.

Check out the cancellations on the stamp. They're rather funky. Besides the 1962 cancellation, you have what appear to be two distinct cancellations underneath which are in different directions and are only on the stamp itself. This could be indicative that this stamp was previously canceled and then pasted on this envelope later. Normally, these cancellations would continue on the backing envelope paper, at least partially.

What about the Yoo-Hoo ad itself? Is it printed right on the envelope? It has to be a safe assumption that nobody in 1962 was printing envelopes commemorating Yoo-Hoo. Seems silly. Also note the same washed-out appearance of that image, not to mention the corner wear. Looks like somebody printed out a vintage ad onto the envelope. If this was printed back then, the Yoo-Hoo image wouldn't have corner wear. Perhaps a little further digging might unearth the very ad with the same wear patterns that was used to replicate the image found on the envelope. I'm guessing it can be found in some auction house's past sales archive.

Also, it's not a FDC as advertised. Beyond the fact there isn't a "first day of issue" cancellation, that stamp was issued in 1954, not 1962.

Wash your hands of this mess, but if you want a monetary refund as opposed to PSA credit (I certainly would), then I would firmly and politely request they make you whole. You can counter that they pay you in full for the piece and all the shipping charges you've incurred. If you have use for PSA credit, then they can certainly give you a much stronger dose of credit in lieu of a refund. If this is any sort of issue, simply ask for it back and let REA refund you as I'm sure they would. They're usually quite easy to work with.

Further thoughts: Yeah, you can see that the ad was printed onto the envelope using a modern printer. Dot city. It has to be more evident with the piece in hand. Also, cursory digging may indicate that the ad first appeared in 1964! Right above the bottle that Whitey Ford is holding on the original ad, there's even what appears to be a date of production: "11-64 25 M". You can see it on this piece, but I'm guessing it's too obscured to read. You can also see the same printer effect on the "signatures" themselves. Also, check out the spaces between the t, the l and the e in Mantle. The printer replicated some of the background of the original piece. Sheesh. This thing is a complete comedy of errors.