Nightmare on YooHoo Road.....Mantle and Berra autographs

[russkcpa]

I win the attached auction from REA in May, 2023....a very nice YooHoo envelope autographed by Mantle and Berra.

https://bid.robertedwardauctions.com...?itemid=145350

I send into PSA for encapsulation and autograph grading in early July, 2023 along with a copy of the PSA/DNA letter.

A few weeks go by and PSA contacts me asking for the original PSA letter which I sent them. They cannot proceed without it.

Three months go by and dead silence. Finally after several emails and calls I am contacted by the PSA/DNA customer relations supervisor indicating that the item cannot be graded or encapsulated because the signatures are deemed to be not authentic. PSA wants to refund the fee that I paid and give me credit (against future services) for the amount I paid to REA. They also want to keep the item and the PSA original certificate.

Pretty frustrating !! What say you autograph experts ??
Russ

[seanofjapan]

I'm not an auto expert nor do I have any similar experience to draw upon, but I'm kind of shocked at what they are asking. If I understand correctly their position is that because they screwed up in issuing a letter of authenticity, which presumably at least partially induced you to purchase the item, they can now unilaterally decide to keep your item (based on what? its still your item) and they also get to unilaterally decide the terms of compensation to you, which is not money but store credit whether you want it or not??

That just seems ridiculously unfair to me....

[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.

[BillyCoxDodgers3B]

Here's some further ridiculousness found with a quick image search. Forgive the size of the scan, but you can see the exact same signatures were used to create this one, in addition to the same hilarious background from the original piece visible in the Mantle. If you enlarge the photo, you can see even stronger evidence of this haloing all around both signatures.

Dumber still is the Yoo-Hoo ad chosen in this instance features card show-era Sharpie autographs right on the piece!

[BillyCoxDodgers3B]

https://www.ebay.com/itm/295951376624

[BillyCoxDodgers3B]

A lot of silly reprints being offered by retro_girl82 on eBay. Whoever you want, they have. Note the same postmark with year removed has been used in all these images, and we also have another previously canceled stamp! They're too cheap to spend literal pennies on mint versions!

https://www.ebay.com/itm/305161048016

[todeen]

Originally Posted by BillyCoxDodgers3B

https://www.ebay.com/itm/295951376624

your research is outstanding!

If it was me, I would ask for the piece to be returned and then ask for a refund through REA. If that's not possible, then I would have REA get in contact with PSA so that they can confirm your piece has been confiscated and you want a refund.

[BillyCoxDodgers3B]

After this, I'd have to imagine case will be closed and refund swiftly issued...one would hope, anyway.

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by BillyCoxDodgers3B

A lot of silly reprints being offered by retro_girl82 on eBay. Whoever you want, they have. Note the same postmark with year removed has been used in all these images, and we also have another previously canceled stamp! They're too cheap to spend literal pennies on mint versions!

https://www.ebay.com/itm/305161048016

Some of us like silly cheap reprints. I applaud retro_girl82 for selling/listing them for exactly what they are. For me the bad part is people that sell them as authentic.

If I was the OP I would want my cash back not some silly coupon.

[perezfan]

Agree. Just get your cash back in full (for item + BP + Shipping + PSA fees). Then be done with it... no coupons.

Awesome research by Jodi.

[russkcpa]

Thanks for all the good advice. I am going to contact REA again. I had previously called customer service a few weeks ago to give them a heads up about this item. Now I think I need to discuss with someone of higher authority.
Russ

[gonefishin]

That's crazy! Let me understand this, as I find this situation a total comedy of errors.

- You won this at auction from a reputable auction house.
- You were comfortable in believing it was authentic (as anyone would) because it was certified by PSA.
- The selling price was dramatically increased because it had been certified by PSA.
- Come to find out, it is fake, from the same authenticator that certified it for the auction.
- PSA wants to retain it, and simply give you redress by simply issuing you credit for the monies you spent!

Burn me once, shame on you! Burn me twice/three times/four times - shame on me!

After all this BS that includes your time, money, loss of the item, etc., STORE CREDIT! This is so bad and unprofessional it upsets me and I'm not the one that was taken advantage of. Hell, this is not much different than the asshole that created the counterfeit piece to begin with! Nowhere is it mentioned that in addition to making it right with you, not just store credit, that either party will go after the thief's that perpetrated the rip off. Instead, we will just keep the item, take it off the market, and let this kind of bullshit continue.

There isn't a whole of difference between what happened to you with them and meeting with an individual that sells this crap direct to an unsuspecting buyer. I don't know what the purchase price was, nor where all parties are located. However, it appears that somewhere down the line a felony has been committed - not just "Here's your store credit - I'll keep the evidence and you just please go away." I'm not saying it's PSA or REA, but someone, and they need to be held accountable.

Both PSA and REA are financially sound enough to create change by attacking the problem at it's source. At least a lot more capable than one individual.

I feel for you, good luck with whatever route you take and keep everyone posted on the outcome.

[rand1com]

I would get a full refund from REA.

They have been held up as the gold standard on this board as recently as a week or so ago when Heritage had the fiasco with the Boston Garter set. It was stated that REA would handle a situation like this professionally.

I certainly would not take a $420 PSA/DNA credit voucher in place of a full refund including the authentication cost.

[Southpaw85]

Originally Posted by bnorth

Some of us like silly cheap reprints. I applaud retro_girl82 for selling/listing them for exactly what they are. For me the bad part is people that sell them as authentic.

If I was the OP I would want my cash back not some silly coupon.

This seller (retro_girl82) is listing things accurately... that said, that Jerry Garcia 'signed' envelope has circulated through the hands of several eBay sellers going back several years, several of whom listed it as authentic (but way cheaper than a Jerry signature ought to run...). In person, it is clearly a modern inkjet copy. Furthermore, for the Jerry signature, I was able to ID the original signature; nothing more than some fancy photoshop skills.

[BillyCoxDodgers3B]

Originally Posted by bnorth

Some of us like silly cheap reprints. I applaud retro_girl82 for selling/listing them for exactly what they are. For me the bad part is people that sell them as authentic.

That's a grey area to me. Sure, this seller is being transparent, but that doesn't keep her from being a part of the problem. She's just the first rung in the ladder. "It's not up to me what other people do with these items!" never played well with me.

I'm sure someone's follow-up will be, "How do you feel about reprint cards if that's the case?", and you'd have me painted into a corner because at their most innocent points as pure, properly marked reprints, I think they're great for anyone to be able to afford a set of cards which may otherwise be unattainable. The obvious response would be that it's the exact same situation with reprint autographs. While that can't be denied, it doesn't mean I have to feel the same way about it as I do reprint cards. As someone who has long been primarily involved with autographs, reprint autographs naturally bother me more than cards. It doesn't make my feelings right or wrong; that's just how they are. Furthermore, how often does anyone see a properly labeled reprint autograph? Practically never. And this very case at hand proves that anybody at any level just may be fooled, even by something as comedic and contrived as these particular envelopes.

I suppose my absolute bottom line is that all reproductions should be properly and rather boldly marked in multiple areas that may not be the most aesthetically pleasing, but geared toward the best effort for deterring removal. While that will never stop, at least make it more difficult for the criminals. In the case of these envelopes, have a few small "REPRINT" marks printed diagonally across the signatures and in a few places on the envelope. It might not look pretty, but I'd rest easier.

[Steve D]

One other note that I don't see mentioned yet.....

The postage rate, as shown in the subsequent posts, was four cents in 1962; so the stamp on the cover in the OP doesn't meet the required postage rate in effect at the time.

The cover is clearly a fake.


Steve

[mcgwirecom]

The 3 cent stamps was already cancelled before it was put on the postcard take a look.

[bammerbb]

I read this whole post and I'm confused and here's why.

1, Why is REA first referred to and why are there 2 different ebay pages about 2 different ads.

2. Who is the correct buyer.

3. If REA is the correct seller, why not just get a total refund from them?

Brian