"Knowledge Through Education"

           March 12, 2006 -- So you’ve run into a dealer or an auction with an Amusement token of one flavor or another that is marked on the holder as being a rare overstrike error.  The piece appears to be of a vintage dating back into the 1940s or maybe earlier and perhaps it is worth the $30 or $40 price tag on the holder.  Or is it?  Is it even an error?  Read on and learn and then you be the judge.

            Kenneth E. Smith, coauthor with Stephen P. Alpert of Video Arcade, Pinball, Slot Machine, And Other Amusement Tokens Of North America 1^st Edition, says in the opening chapter to the section on Minnesota tokens (pages 98-99) of that book:

            “When making token orders it was the practice of W.ST.WKS. to stamp the following: 120 tokens for a 100 token order 225 for a 200 token order, 530 for a 500 token order, and 1040 for a 1000 token order.  The best 100, 200, 500, or 1000 were selected to fill the order.  The mutilated, bent cracked, and off center tokens were put into the melt box; the remainder were put into sample boxes.  When dies were set up prior to the token run it was the practice to take a few tokens from the sample box of that size and overstamp them to check the dies.  The overstamped tokens were often returned to the sample boxes.  This is one reason why there are so many pinball tokens with 1, 2, or 3 different understampings as they were used several times for die checking.  In late 1942 N.W.ST.WKS. ran out of brass and nickel blanks due to World War II shortages.  To fill token orders, they had to resort to overstamping tokens from their amusement sample boxes.  About 40,000 tokens were overstamped in this manner and sold mostly to taverns in St. Paul. … Thousands of overstruck tokens are known to exist today.”  

            So there is your answer!  They are not errors!  As for value – you will have to be the judge.

Al’s Place token struck on a token identified as from Egans.
Neither token was intended to be struck on a planchet with a center hole or punch out.
Click On Image For Enlarged View; Arrow Back To Return

Coin-A-Matic token struck over another unidentified token.
Click On Image For Enlarged View; Arrow Back To Return

B&G Amusement Co token stuck on an Andy’s token that was in turn struck on an ACWS token.
Click On Image For Enlarged View; Arrow Back To Return

What is so interesting about the overstrike tokens of the era that Smith describes is that there are so many of them that collecting them by overstrike combinations could became a hobby unto its own.  While he was alive, Smith was known to be collecting such data but to the best of my knowledge this work never saw fruitarian.  Perhaps even more interesting is that according to Smith in another section of his book; some of the proprietorships listed on the tokens are only known as understrikes.  This suggests it is possible that some businesses failed before they even took delivery of their tokens and the tokens then recycled into new ones by overstamping them.

 While the practice of overstriking North American amusement tokens clearly dates back to at least the 1940’s, it is a practice we still see evidence of in recent times.  Examples of a number of different overstamping have been sold to vendors in large quantities as recently as the 1980s and perhaps into the 1990s.  We’ll take a closer look at some of those in a future article on this subject.        

This article first appeared in the March 21 to April 3, 2006 issue of Canadian Coin News
It is represented here with slight revisions   

    History of the "Oh, No It Ain't ...!!" column:  A number of years ago, CONECA member, Bill Fivaz penned a popular long-running series entitled, "Oh, No It Ain't ...!!"  It was published in the CONECA Errorscope for 26 consecutive issues from the March 1991 issue through the July/August 1994 issue.  His focus was on a variety of different coins that at first glance may have fooled many collectors into believing they were legitimate error coins.  It included such items as faked clips, double strikes and brockages; plugged coins, reeded blanks, Mint/Proof Set Sealing Device damage, "jumbo coins" (from hammering), etc.
    When Bill finally ended the series he indicated that if there was anybody who wanted to carry it on that it was open to them.  Later, when I mentioned the column to him in casual conversation, he repeated his offer and suggested that if I was interested in reviving the series -- to feel free.  That offer was made eight or nine years ago and since then I've entertained the idea, off and on, many times.
    The clincher was the CONECA Membership Survey that was sent out in 2003.  In it we asked members for their likes/dislikes and suggestions of what they'd like to see in the Errorscope or on the web site.  Respondents ranked a column such as this one right at the top of the list.  So be it!  The revived "Oh, No It Ain't...!!" column will continue on from where Bill left off.  I hope you enjoy!   Ken Potter 03/11/04.