Counterparty token misprints

4 min readDec 31, 2021


While creating a new Counterparty token a few weeks ago, I was puzzled after checking the issuances tab on I saw another issuance dated back four years. The last line („Status“) was reading: „invalid: insufficient funds“. And that was the reason why I could claim that token in 2021 at all. I have to admit that I was kind of excited...

I was writing a few lines in Python to check whether there are further cases like that. In the first step, the API read function is the following (the other code is based on the examples provided in

Figure 1: Retrieving issuance information

If you are mainly interested in vintage tokens, you can leave the block_index filter in there. Without filtering for block height, I found 602 cases with an „insufficient funds“ status. (Note that there are other reasons for an invalid status such as trying to create a token with less than four characters.)

In the second step, I checked if these tokens have been successfully claimed in the meantime. I was using the fact that these tokens are invisible on until they have been claimed successfully. The API read function “get_asset_names” returns all observable Counterparty tokens:

Figure 2: Retrieving all observable tokens

I just combined the two requests and filtered for those tokens from step 1 that did not appear in the second step. 363 of such unclaimed tokens were still available when I was running my analysis. Some were initially created just a few days after the TEST token in January 2014.

For those interested in these special Counterparty tokens, I guide you through an example. SATOSHIDICE was created with Counterparty tx number 1,952 ( on 2014–01–19 (17:11 GMT).

Figure 3: Initial token creation

The XCP fee of 0.0000005 XCP was not paid because wallet “1Lv247acAnRtSrCQpBACvmdvdNSGtSzeB6” has never held any XCP (nor BTC) according to the wallet’s Credit / Debit history. Hence, this token was attempted to create but was invisible because the fees were not paid and it was not registered successfully.

SATOSHIDICE was invisible to the general public because it did not appear in the token list. The token was only visible via API because that way one observes all issuances, including the discussed insufficiently funded issuances.

In a second transaction, I claimed the SATOSHIDICE token with Counterparty tx number 1,822,063 (

Figure 4: Second transaction

The token creation on December 15, 2021, was successful and the issuer’s wallet is “135qDvhy3sMP7Kqi5yyomYBB37d1H2cr84”. Note that technically I did not burn any tokens but rather chose an appropriate supply independent of the first transaction’s original supply of 100 million. The only additional step was to click „OK“ on a warning message. I interpret these tokens as a kind of misprint because unintentionally the registration was not working out as planned. It’s comparable to famous IRL misprints with the “wrong” color printed on stamps (“Blue Mauritius”). Or the few Twitter Eggs that were changed by some users and are also labeled misprints.

Below you find an example of a still unclaimed token JPYMORGAN (2015–05–25). It says that JPYMORGAN is already registered (note that I did not save a screenshot while creating SATOSHIDICE).

Figure 5: Warning message

Finally, the SATOSHIDICE token became visible again and has been listed as token number 170 right after the famous TESTER token. Its supply was increased to 200, artwork metadata was added, and supply was locked in further transactions. In contrast to most other early Counterparty tokens, SATOSHIDICE is in an active wallet, locked, indivisible, and comes with crypto-relevant artwork. The latter refers to a blockchain-based game that started in 2012. In the early days, SatoshiDice was among the most popular Bitcoin addresses. In 2013, SatoshiDice was sold for 126,315 BTC, worth around $12 million at that time.

Figure 6: List of 2014 Counterparty tokens

I hope that these explanations clarify the issue of Counterparty misprint tokens. The issuance process should be as transparent as possible for future buyers/collectors of this special kind of tokens.

Disclaimer: I claimed some tokens that were initially created in the years 2014 to 2017. I left the others for fellow vintage NFT connoisseurs. Some of them, including JPYMORGAN, have been claimed in the meantime. You can contact me via Twitter for further help/information. I’m also open to collaborations to use these vintage tokens in a meaningful way.

Updated on March 31, 2023.




Ordinals | Data analytics | Digital artifacts