GameStop bought 4,710 Bitcoin worth $512 million. I think this is the buy signal institutions and smart retails. Dumb retails will buy in a few months later and get rekt.

Channel
Steve Alpha Gems
@SteveCryptoReviews
On this record: Growth · Engagement · Posts · Citations · Handles named that no longer answer · Cite this entry
2,295subscribers
-34 since we began measuring on 7 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 1,000–3,162.
Register entry
| Telegram ID | -1001518472464 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @SteveCryptoReviews |
| Created | Between 1 August 2021 and 31 January 2023— estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated. |
| First recorded | 7 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 12 August 2026 |
| Measurements held | 4 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 1 time, most recently 12 August 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/SteveCryptoReviews |
Growth
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 12 Aug 2026, 12:15 | 2,295 | -15 |
| 9 Aug 2026, 15:31 | 2,310 | -19 |
| 7 Aug 2026, 00:52 | 2,329 | no change |
| 7 Aug 2026, 00:46 | 2,329 | first reading |
Engagement
20 posts held, back to 21 January 2025 — the reader has not yet reached the start of this channel’s public history, so older posts may sit further back, unread. Read across 2 pagesof Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
Nothing published in the last 30 days. ERR and ER are rolling 30-day measures, so there is nothing to compute — we hold 20 posts for this entry, the most recent from 28 May 2025. An engagement rate over an empty window would be a number about nothing.
Recent posts
Steve Alpha Gems pinned «Trump Media secured $2.5billion funding to purchase Bitcoin. This should do well for crypto ngl. 🔼»
Trump Media secured $2.5billion funding to purchase Bitcoin. This should do well for crypto ngl. 🔼
Steve Alpha Gems pinned «Gm fam! Where do we think Bitcoin is headed next?»
Gm fam! Where do we think Bitcoin is headed next?
Steve Alpha Gems pinned «⬜️🟧 Meet EggSog $SHIBAKO (ETH) – the yolked-up Shiba who scrambled into crypto to fry the competition! Hatched from chaos, fueled by memes, and allergic to bear markets, Shibako doesn’t just bark—he boils with energy. Contract: 0x492e80fAfE23f1DDd35Cd126…»
⬜️🟧 Meet EggSog $SHIBAKO (ETH) – the yolked-up Shiba who scrambled into crypto to fry the competition! Hatched from chaos, fueled by memes, and allergic to bear markets, Shibako doesn’t just bark—he boils with energy. Contract: 0x492e80fAfE23f1DDd35Cd12659A59f494549949c Telegram | X | Website https://www.instagram.com/iconix.shibako/ https://www.tiktok.com/discover/shibako
Steve Alpha Gems pinned «There has been a massive exploit on the SUI blockchain. The liquidity provider CETUS is hacked and draining pools and no decentralized swaps are working atm. https://x.com/0xabhip/status/1925509608871010350 CEXs are safe but there might be a huge dump because…»
There has been a massive exploit on the SUI blockchain. The liquidity provider CETUS is hacked and draining pools and no decentralized swaps are working atm. https://x.com/0xabhip/status/1925509608871010350 CEXs are safe but there might be a huge dump because of this eventually.
$BTC is at a new ATH! May was indeed good as the force is strong with Bitcoin ✔️
Steve Alpha Gems pinned a photo
Who remembers Biceps?? 🟩🟦 The same team has launched Triceps (BSC)! This is the team known to launch bangers and almost all of them have been posted here early and done really well! It's also been listed on CMC already and they said CMC weekly trending will come today! Remember, this team doesn't do a lot of promos and they just keep working for months. 190k MC right now, hoping for millions in a week or so!! Contr…
Showing the 12 most recent of 20 posts we hold for @SteveCryptoReviews. View and reaction counts are the latest single reading for each post, not a live figure, and a recent post is still accumulating both. A view count marked ≈ was rounded by Telegram before we ever saw it — t.me prints views in full below 1,000 and to three significant figures above, so ≈1,200,000 means somewhere between 1,150,000 and 1,249,999. Unmarked counts are exact. Text is reproduced from the public post preview and truncated for length.
Citation-graph rank
Citation-graph rank — 550,440 of 1,160,990entries in the measured graph. A weighted position computed from the forward and mention edges below — republished posts weigh more than named mentions — and recomputed periodically, over the whole graph. Published only as this ordinal position, never as a score: a position is a fact, and a score printed beside one channel’s name would read as a verdict this register does not make. The two counts beneath stay separate for the same reason mentions are never summed with forwards anywhere else on this page — a named-by count costs nothing to manufacture. The top 100 by this measure, or how it is computed.
Forward network
Republished by
Channels on the register that have forwarded this channel's posts into their own feed.
Built only from forwarded posts we have actually read, on both sides. Coverage is early and deliberately incomplete: a missing link means we have not read the post that would prove it, never that the relationship does not exist. Counts are distinct forwarded posts observed, so they only ever go up as we read more.
Mentions
Named by 1 registered channel — every channel on the register whose own posts have named this one, by its current username or any other username it currently holds, merged from two separately captured readings of the same fact so a namer caught by only one of them is not missed and a namer both caught is not counted twice. A username this channel has since dropped is not matched — that handle may belong to someone else now, and crediting today’s namer to yesterday’s owner would misattribute it.
Named by
Channels on the register whose posts name this channel's handle.
Names
Channels on the register whose handles appear in this channel's posts.
A mention is a weaker signal than a forward and is counted separately for that reason — naming a channel is not republishing it, and a handle in a post body is easy to place deliberately. The post counts beside each row below are distinct posts in which the handle appeared, from posts we have read on both sides — the “Named by N registered channels” figure above is a different count, of distinct NAMING CHANNELS rather than posts, and is not the sum of the rows under it.
Handles this channel named that no longer answer
- Dead references
- 1
- handles named in this channel’s posts, vacant today
- Evidenced gone
- 0
- we ourselves saw one of these resolve, at some point
- Never seen alive
- 1
- vacant every time we have ever looked
@SteveCryptoReviews named 1 handle that resolve to nothing today. That is a fact about the reference, not necessarily a fact about the handle’s history — see the two groups below.
Most of these may never have existed as a live channel at all.A handle a channel names can be a typo, an aspirational name nobody registered, or a channel that was already gone before this one ever mentioned it. Unless a row below is marked evidenced, all we know is that it references a handle that is not a live channel today — not that anything “died”. How this is measured.
Never seen alive
References a handle that is not a live channel — we have no record it ever was one.
named in 1 post, 8 August 2026 – 8 August 2026
Cite this entry
A live page changes as we take new readings, so a citation should name the measurement it is based on, not just the URL. The line below cites the subscriber count as measured 12 August 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“Steve Alpha Gems” (@SteveCryptoReviews), 2,295 subscribers as measured 12 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/SteveCryptoReviews.
Full measurement history, CC BY 4.0. Every reading this register holds for this entry, not just the latest one, as a dated, downloadable record: CSV · JSON. Free to use with attribution to tgregister.com. Each file carries its own generation timestamp, which is the figure to cite for exactly when the data was retrieved.