엔비디아 CEO 교체 발표, 젠슨 황 사임에 따라 콜레트 크레스 CFO가 임시 CEO
😱59😭19❤12😨6👏1

Channel
@bornlupin
On this record: Topic · Observations · Channels linked by matching posts · Growth · Engagement · What this channel posts · Reactions · Posts · Citations · Telegram's recommendations · Cite this entry
49,268subscribers
+3,539 since we began measuring on 6 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 31,623–100,000.
| Telegram ID | -1001513828114 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @bornlupin |
| Description | 루팡 Invest |
| Created | 23 May 2022 — measured — cross-checked against a third-party dataset (ext.tg_channel) |
| First recorded | 6 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 12 November 2026 |
| Measurements held | 64 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 1 time, most recently 12 November 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/bornlupin |
Crypto & trading — a classification, not a measurement. An on-box language model (Qwen3.6-35B-A3B-UD-Q6_K_XL, prompt version 1) read this channel’s own recent posts on 21 August 2026 and assigned it the closest of 31 fixed categories, at 61% confidence. This is a model’s judgement about what the channel is likely to be about, not a fact this register measured the way a subscriber count or a view count is measured — it can be revised on a later pass, and it carries no weight anywhere else on this page. How this classification works, and the other topics.
These are measurements, not verdicts. Each one below states something we counted, alongside the evidence it was counted from, so you can check it rather than take it. None of them is graded: every observation this register holds is recorded at severity 0, because the precision of the detectors behind them has not been measured yet, and a rating we cannot support is worse than none. Read each as a fact about the data, not as a judgement about the channel. How we measure.
Posts published here appear in near-verbatim form on 12 other registered channels. This entry also sits inside a group of 4 channels linked by matching posts, directly or through other channels in the group; two members of the group may share no posts with each other. The matching is on the text itself, not on Telegram’s forward marker, so it finds a copy whether or not it was labelled as one.
| Posted first | Then | Overlap | Gap |
|---|---|---|---|
| @bornlupin/21016 · this entry5 Nov 2026, 08:49 UTC | @sharpha/571785 Nov 2026, 10:20 UTC | 1.00 | 1.5 hours |
| @bornlupin/21037 · this entry6 Nov 2026, 14:01 UTC | @sharpha/572457 Nov 2026, 01:08 UTC | 1.00 | 11 hours |
| @bornlupin/21067 · this entry9 Nov 2026, 11:24 UTC | @sharpha/573459 Nov 2026, 11:39 UTC | 1.00 | 16 minutes |
| @bornlupin/21069 · this entry9 Nov 2026, 12:35 UTC | @sharpha/573529 Nov 2026, 12:44 UTC | 1.00 | 8 minutes |
| @kimcharger/1410719 Aug 2026, 23:53 UTC | @bornlupin/19764 · this entry19 Aug 2026, 23:54 UTC | 1.00 | 72 seconds |
| @kimcharger/1431515 Oct 2026, 00:17 UTC | @bornlupin/20625 · this entry15 Oct 2026, 00:21 UTC | 1.00 | 4 minutes |
| Channel | Matching posts | Text overlap | Typical gap | Published first |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| @Yeouido_Lab | 65 (8/8 hand-verifiable sample passed) | 1.00 | 6 minutes | this entry (51–14) |
| @sharpha | 31 (8/8 hand-verifiable sample passed) | 0.99 | 80 minutes | this entry (31–0) |
| @FastStockNewsUSA | 50 (8/8 hand-verifiable sample passed) | 1.00 | 22 minutes | this entry (50–0) |
| @kimcharger | 17 (8/8 hand-verifiable sample passed) | 1.00 | 5 minutes | this entry (13–4) |
| @Ten_level | 35 (8/8 hand-verifiable sample passed) | 1.00 | 4 minutes | this entry (29–6) |
| @corevalue | 30 (8/8 hand-verifiable sample passed) | 1.00 | 10 minutes | this entry (16–14) |
| @cahier_de_market | 22 (8/8 hand-verifiable sample passed) | 1.00 | 13 minutes | this entry (18–4) |
| @free_life59 | 46 (8/8 hand-verifiable sample passed) | 1.00 | 12 minutes | this entry (39–7) |
| @meritz_research | 7 (7/7 hand-verifiable sample passed) | 1.00 | 23 minutes | @meritz_research (7–0) |
| @jake8lee | 30 (8/8 hand-verifiable sample passed) | 1.00 | 26 minutes | this entry (29–1) |
| @YeouidoStory2 | 6 (6/6 hand-verifiable sample passed) | 1.00 | 13 minutes | even |
| @gaoshoukorea | 17 (8/8 hand-verifiable sample passed) | 1.00 | 60 minutes | this entry (16–1) |
Text overlap is the Jaccard coefficient over the set of distinct three-word phrases in the two bodies: 1.00 is identical wording, and the threshold for counting a pair at all is 0.70. Candidates are generated by simhash LSH (4 x 16-bit bands, exact Hamming <= 3) verified against the bodies with Jaccard over the SET of distinct 3-word shingles. Published first counts which side of each matching pair carries the earlier timestamp — in this corpus, which is the limitation directly below.
What this cannot establish
MEASURED, DOMINANT ERROR SOURCE: a post ingested before 2026-08-06 may have carried a forward header that was not recorded. A 45-pair hand-check against live t.me pages found 14 (31%) where the live page shows a forward header naming the other channel and the database has none, plus 4 more (9%) naming a third party. The text match itself was wrong 0 times out of 45. Read attribution_capture.items_in_trusted_window before treating the unattributed count as a claim.
Telegram lets a channel forward a post with a header naming the source, and we only began reliably recording that header on 2026-08-06. 31 of the 34 matches recorded here fall after that date and carried no header when we read them. The rest predate reliable capture and are not evidence either way.
“Published first” means first in this corpus. We hold 1,284 comparable posts for this entry, running 5 August 2026 to 11 November 2026. A channel we have read one page deep will look younger than a neighbour we have read in full, and the order would flip with no change in the underlying facts.
The detector’s own notes on this observation, as it recorded them. Names in this_style are fields of the underlying evidence record, which the plain-English paragraphs above read out for this entry.
Of the group of 4 channels, the one whose matching posts we hold earliest is @upper_limit_price. That channel is not among the channels listed above, so this entry may share no posts with it and this does not say where this entry’s content came from. It is a statement about our reading window, not a claim of authorship.
Recorded under the keys clone_copy · clone_mutual · clone_source, last confirmed 12 November 2026. An observation that a later pass no longer finds is cleared, and a cleared observation is removed from this page rather than being shown struck through — we do not keep publishing a claim we have withdrawn. Dispute an observation.
This channel is in a group of 4 registered channels linked by matching posts, directly or through other channels in the group. This channel may share no posts with some of the channels listed below, and listed channels may share none with each other. Links are found by comparing text fingerprints across every channel on the register.
Which channel, if either, published first is deliberately not shown in this list. “First” could only mean first in our own crawl, which depends on how deep we happened to reach into each channel’s history, not on when the content was actually first posted. Our one hand-check read 45 of the highest-confidence flagged pairs against the live Telegram pages. In 18 of them the live page showed a “Forwarded from” credit that our database had no record of, so reading that pair as an unattributed copy was wrong; the check did not measure who published first. This list is ordered by subscriber count, the same as every other listing on this site, never by which channel we think came first. Near-verbatim matching has several ordinary explanations besides copying — a channel mirroring itself, an unattributed repost, or two channels independently repeating the same wire story — and this measurement cannot tell those apart. How this is measured.
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 12 Nov 2026, 08:00 | 49,268 | +26 |
| 10 Nov 2026, 06:00 | 49,242 | +19 |
| 8 Nov 2026, 15:58 | 49,223 | +17 |
| 7 Nov 2026, 09:44 | 49,206 | +11 |
| 6 Nov 2026, 11:07 | 49,195 | +13 |
| 5 Nov 2026, 11:58 | 49,182 | +10 |
| 4 Nov 2026, 14:18 | 49,172 | +38 |
| 3 Nov 2026, 17:25 | 49,134 | +42 |
| 2 Nov 2026, 15:09 | 49,092 | +56 |
| 1 Nov 2026, 16:24 | 49,036 | +17 |
| 31 Oct 2026, 16:21 | 49,019 | +32 |
| 30 Oct 2026, 16:56 | 48,987 | +25 |
| 29 Oct 2026, 17:20 | 48,962 | +52 |
| 28 Oct 2026, 14:49 | 48,910 | +28 |
| 27 Oct 2026, 12:46 | 48,882 | +25 |
| 26 Oct 2026, 10:21 | 48,857 | +21 |
| 25 Oct 2026, 11:37 | 48,836 | +6 |
| 23 Oct 2026, 08:05 | 48,830 | -1 |
| 22 Oct 2026, 05:41 | 48,831 | +35 |
| 20 Oct 2026, 22:20 | 48,796 | first reading |
1,475 posts held, back to 5 August 2026 — the reader has not yet reached the start of this channel’s public history, so older posts may sit further back, unread. Read across 197 pages of Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
ERR is average views per post over the last 30 days divided by subscribers, the definition TGStat uses, so this figure is comparable with the one you will see elsewhere. It falls structurally as a channel grows: a high ERR on a small channel and a low one on a large channel describe reach mathematics, not quality. We publish the figure and the sample it came from and pass no verdict on it.
ER is defined industry-wide as (forwards + reactions + comments) ÷ views — note the denominator is views, not subscribers. Telegram’s public web preview carries views and reactions but not forward or comment counts, so the reaction rate above is the reactions term only and is therefore a floor: the true ER for this channel is higher by an amount we have not measured and will not estimate. It is computed over the 504 of 505 measured posts that carry a reaction reading, and over those same posts' views.
| Window | Rolling 30 days · latest post in window 12 November 2026 |
|---|---|
| Posts held | 1,475 (5 August 2026 – 12 November 2026) |
| Views total | 5,315,040 |
| Reactions total | 21,612 |
| Forwards / comments | not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated |
| Readings taken | 12 Nov 2026, 17:36 UTC |
Views are a single reading per post, taken at the time above. A post published in the last day or two is still accumulating views, which pulls the 30-day average down slightly. That is a property of the standard definition rather than a fault in it, so we keep the definition rather than “correcting” the number into something nobody can reproduce.
Precision. Telegram publishes view counts on its public widget in short form — 8.12K, 3.7M — so any reading at or above 1,000 reaches us rounded to three significant figures, and only counts below 1,000 are exact. Averages and rates derived from them are shown to the same precision rather than to the unit: a figure like 3,701,250 would assert digits nobody measured.
Reaction counts are published per emoji and rounded the same way, so a total below 1,000 is exact and a larger one is a sum that may carry a rounded component from each emoji above 1,000. Because it is a sum, it does not look rounded — read a large reaction total as three significant figures per contributing emoji rather than as the figure it prints.
Lifetime counters from Telegram’s own channel header, read 12 November 2026 — not the date at the top of this page, which is when the subscriber count was last read. A count marked ≈ was rounded by Telegram before we ever saw it — t.me prints these counters in full below 1,000 and to three significant figures above, so ≈142,000 means somewhere between 141,500 and 142,499.
Measured directly from 7 videos with a duration reading, out of the posts we hold for this channel — not this channel’s whole posting history, only the sample this register has actually read. An exact reading to the second, taken from the post itself rather than from Telegram’s own rounded chrome, so it carries no ≈ mark.
37,249 reactions across 999 posts, in 48 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 57.7% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| ❤ | 21,475 | 57.7% | |
| 👍 | 5,835 | 15.7% | |
| 🙏 | 1,852 | 4.97% | |
| 🔥 | 1,367 | 3.67% | |
| 🤣 | 1,081 | 2.90% | |
| 👏 | 664 | 1.78% | |
| ❤🔥 | 552 | 1.48% | |
| 😁 | 462 | 1.24% | |
| 😱 | 457 | 1.23% | |
| 🤡 | 366 | 0.983% | |
| 🤯 | 358 | 0.961% | |
| 😭 | 281 | 0.754% | |
| ⚡ | 274 | 0.736% | |
| 😨 | 262 | 0.703% | |
| 😢 | 261 | 0.701% | |
| 🦄 | 180 | 0.483% | |
| 🕊 | 155 | 0.416% | |
| 🤨 | 138 | 0.37% | |
| ✍ | 137 | 0.368% | |
| 👀 | 129 | 0.346% | |
| 28 further kinds | 963 | 2.59% |
No sentiment is inferred, and none should be read in. This table is ordered by count and by nothing else. Emoji do not carry stable meaning across languages or communities — 🙏 is thanks in one channel and mourning in another — so we publish which ones were pressed and how often, and pass no judgement on what an audience meant by them.
Precision. Telegram publishes reaction counts per emoji and short-forms each one — 4.34K, 1.2M — so any single kind at or above 1,000 reaches us at three significant figures, and only counts below 1,000 are exact. The shares above are ratios of those figures and carry the same error. This is also why the total here can differ slightly from a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page: both are sums of the same rounded parts, taken over samples with different edges.
Coverage. Reactions were read on 999 of the 1,000 sampled posts in this sample. Summed by Telegram’s own count on each post — not by adding up the per-emoji breakdown above — those same posts carry 37,249 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 1,000 most recent posts we hold (the sample is capped at 1,000), published 8 September 2026 to 12 November 2026, using the newest reading held for each. Telegram Stars are excluded: they are a payment, not a reaction, and they have their own section.
Telegram’s own ‘edited’ marker: 18 of 505 posts held from the last 30 days (3.56%) carried it when this register last read them. The marker says a post was changed after publishing, not what it said before — this register holds the earlier wording only where an edit fell between two of its own reads (see the edit ledger and how it is measured).
엔비디아 CEO 교체 발표, 젠슨 황 사임에 따라 콜레트 크레스 CFO가 임시 CEO
😱59😭19❤12😨6👏1
네비우스(NBIS) 2026년 3분기 어닝콜 Q&A 중 질문) Vineland 데이터센터의 공급 지연 원인은 무엇이며, 다른 데이터센터에도 문제가 있습니까? 경영진 답변: 핵심 원인은 전력 공급 문제입니다. 당초 DataOne의 임시 발전설비를 사용하면서 블룸에너지(BE)의 발전설비를 단계적으로 가동할 계획이었습니다. 그러나 3분기 말 DataOne이 예상보다 빠르게 임시 발전설비 운영을 종료하기로 결정했습니다. 이 때문에 기존 전력 공급과 블룸에너지 발전설비의 본격 가동 사이에 공백이 발생했습니다. 8월에는 기존 디젤발전기 계획을 사용할 수 없다는 통보를 받았고, 블룸에너지를 활용하는 새로운 해결책으로 전환했습니다. 블룸에너지 발전설비는 이미 현장에서 실제 전력을 생산하고 있습니다. 현재 과제는 설비 출력을 최대한 빠르게 …
❤18✍1🔥1
네비우스(NBIS) 2026년 3분기 어닝콜 Q&A 중 질문: 최근 채권시장 여건이 좋지 않은데, 추가 자금이 필요할 경우 고객 선급금을 더 받을 수 있습니까? 경영진 답변: 가능합니다. 고객 선급금은 자금 수요에 대응하는 중요한 수단입니다. 네비우스는 수요가 충분했음에도 더 나은 계약 조건을 확보하기 위해 일부 용량의 판매를 유보해 왔습니다. 그 결과 판매가격 상승과 선급금 확대를 동시에 달성했습니다. 고객은 실제 GPU 용량이 공급되기 훨씬 전부터 선급금을 지급하고 있습니다. 기업 차입금리가 높아지면 장기 계약을 늘려 더 많은 선급금을 확보할 수 있습니다. 반대로 자본시장 환경이 좋아지면 차입을 늘리고 단기 고가 계약 비중을 높일 수 있습니다. 계약 선급금이 전체 CAPEX의 100% 이상을 충당한다면 매우 유리한 위치에 …
👍16❤4🔥2😎2
일라이 릴리(Eli Lilly), 중국의 먹는 비만 치료제 승인에 주가 상승 1. 중국 내 경구용 비만약 '오포글리프론' 승인 및 주가 상승 중국 의약품 규제 당국이 일라이 릴리의 경구용 비만 치료제인 오포글리프론(orforglipron)을 승인하면서, 목요일 장전 거래(프리마켓)에서 릴리 주가가 상승. 릴리는 오포글리프론의 승인을 가장 먼저 신청해 허가를 받았으며, 경쟁사인 덴마크 노보 노디스크(Novo Nordisk)의 경구용 위고비(Wegovy)는 아직 중국 승인을 받지 못한 상태입니다. 이로써 릴리는 세계 2위 제약 시장인 중국에서 경쟁 우위를 점하게 되었습니다. 2. 중국 비만 치료제 시장 전망 및 경쟁 구도 중국 국가위생건강위원회는 2030년까지 중국 내 과체중 또는 비만 인구 비율이 65%를 넘어설 수 있다고 전망했습니…
👍5❤1🔥1
네비우스(NBIS) 2026년 3분기 어닝콜 중 데이터센터 건설 지연과 2027년 확장 관련 -뉴저지를 포함한 일부 코로케이션 데이터센터 건설이 지연되고 있습니다. 일부 용량의 가동 일정이 2027년으로 연기됐습니다. 이에 따라 2026년 예정 매출 일부가 2027년 초로 이연됩니다. 다만 해당 고객 계약이나 용량이 취소된 것은 아닙니다. -네비우스가 직접 소유하고 개발하는 데이터센터는 계획대로 진행되거나 일정보다 앞서 있습니다. 향후 추가로 확보할 1GW 용량의 대부분은 자체 데이터센터에서 공급할 예정입니다. 토지, 전력, 건물, 하드웨어, 소프트웨어, 운영까지 직접 통합 관리합니다. Microsoft와 Meta의 장기 계약을 담보로 추가 자산담보 금융조달이 가능합니다. -2027년 가이던스 경영진은 2027년에 대해 강한…
❤21🔥2
네비우스(NBIS) 2026년 3분기 어닝콜 중 -고객 선급금으로 설비투자 부담 대폭 감소 신규 계약의 고객 선급금이 해당 계약 용량을 가동하기 위한 CAPEX의 100% 이상을 충당하게 됐습니다. (2분기에는 CAPEX의 50~60% 수준) 신규 설비의 투자금 회수기간은 1년 10개월에서 1년 7개월로 단축됐습니다. 3분기 체결 계약금액의 90% 이상에 선급금 조건이 포함됐습니다. 2026년 고객의 약정 선급금은 100억 달러에 이를 것으로 예상합니다. 고객들은 더 높은 가격을 지불하고, 더 일찍 돈을 지급하며, 더 오랜 기간 계약하고 있습니다. 그 결과 우리는 투자금을 더 빠르게 회수하고 있습니다.
❤21
Roman Chernin - Nebius 공동창업자, CBO 3분기 실적과 주주 서한이 발표되었습니다! 요약하자면: 자본적 지출(CAPEX)을 충당하는 선급금이 포함된 120억 달러 규모의 신규 계약 체결. 수억 달러 규모의 연간 반복 매출(ARR)을 기록하며 수익 창출을 시작한 토큰 팩토리(Token Factory). 데이터브릭스(DataBricks), 스노우플레이크(Snowflake), 데이터독(Datadog) 등 최고의 엔터프라이즈 독립 소프트웨어 공급업체(ISV)들로부터 얻은 신뢰. 이제 막 시작했을 뿐이며, 우리가 이곳에 있는 이유를 다시금 상기해 봅니다: 시장은 흔히 두 가지 별개의 카테고리로 설명되곤 합니다. 컴퓨팅 자원을 공급하는 인프라 제공업체와, 모델을 실제 프로덕션 시스템으로 전환하는 소프트웨어 플랫폼입니다…
❤30🔥1
네비우스( $NBIS) 2026년 3분기 실적 1. 3분기 실적: 매출·EBITDA 예상 상회 • 매출 $980.8M (예상 $908M) → 8.0% 상회, YoY +571%, QoQ +68% • 조정 EBITDA $465.8M (예상 $353M) → 32.0% 상회, 마진 47.5% • AI 클라우드 EBITDA $518.2M, 마진 53.2% • GAAP EPS -$0.13 • GAAP 영업이익 $50.4M → 흑자 전환 • 계속영업 순손실 -$37.5M → 전년 대비 손실 69% 감소 • 조정 순이익 $90.9M → 흑자 전환 • 영업현금흐름 -$273M • 3분기 CapEx 약 $7.3B • 보유 현금 $7.4B • 9월 말 ARR $6.4B → YoY +1,062% • 잔여이행의무(RPO) $38.7B 2. 고객 계약조…
👍35❤21❤🔥1👏1
폭스콘 연간 사업 가시성이 개선됨에 따라, 4대 주요 제품 부문 모두에 대한 전망치를 상향 조정함. 현재 고객 수요를 바탕으로 2027년 사업 전망에 대해 매우 강한 자신감을 보이며, 지속적인 성장을 예상함. 타이트한 칩 및 메모리 공급이 업계 전반의 과제가 되고 있으며, 2027년에도 수요가 공급을 계속 초과할 것으로 전망함. 4분기 AI 서버 랙(Rack) 출하량이 전 분기 대비 높은 두 자릿수(High Double Digits) 성장률을 기록할 것으로 예상함.
❤25👏3🔥1
폭스콘, 클라우드 서비스 제공업체(CSP)가 주 고객으로 유지되나 2027년에는 네오클라우드 고객사 추가 예상
👍16❤6👏2🔥1
지엔씨에너지 수주잔고 추이
❤24🔥1
폭스콘(Hon Hai) 2026년 3분기 실적 견조한 AI 서버 수요에 힘입어 2026년 3분기 매출, 영업이익, 순이익 모두 시장 예상치를 크게 상회 엔비디아의 최대 서버 제조사이자 애플의 최대 아이폰 조립업체인 폭스콘은 AI 인프라 구축 열풍의 직접적인 수혜를 입으며 강력한 성장세 3분기 주요 실적 수치 (7월~9월) 매출: 3조 200억 대만달러 (시장 예상치 2조 8,500억 대만달러 상회) 영업이익: 1,153억 5,000만 대만달러 (시장 예상치 1,001억 7,000만 대만달러 대비 약 15% 상회) 순이익: 775억 2,000만 대만달러, 미화 약 23억 5,000만 달러 (전년 동기 577억 대만달러 대비 34% 증가, LSEG 컨센서스 696억 대만달러 상회) 주당순이익(EPS): 5.51 대만달러 수익성 지…
❤21👍3👏1
Showing the 12 most recent of 1,475 posts we hold for @bornlupin. 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.
Republished by
Channels on the register that have forwarded this channel's posts into their own feed.
Republished by 186 registered channels. The 48 listed are the ones that have forwarded the most posts; the rest are counted here but not each listed.
Republishes
Channels on the register whose posts this channel has forwarded.
Republishes 60 registered channels. The 48 listed are the ones this channel has forwarded most; the rest are counted here but not each listed.
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.
Named by 9 registered channels — 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.
Telegram’s own answer, not this register’s. When this register asks Telegram’s API what is similar to this channel, this is the list it returns, in the exact order Telegram returns it — never re-sorted by subscribers or by anything else this register measures. The relationship, and the order, are Telegram’s; we record them and date them, and make no claim of our own about which of these channels actually resemble this one.
Read from Telegram’s recommendation API, most recently 2 September 2026. Telegram holds a list like this for a small and growing share of the register — how this is measured, and why most channel pages show nothing here.
The reverse of the list above, and a different kind of signal. This does not require this channel to have ever been asked about directly — each row below is a channel we DID ask Telegram about, whose Telegram-generated list happened to include this one. A channel can appear here with an empty list above it, because being named by someone else’s query is independent of having been queried itself.
This channel appears in 45 seed channels' Telegram-generated recommendation lists in total, of which the 24 where it ranks highest are shown above. Each is Telegram’s list for THAT channel, not this one — see how this is measured.
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 November 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“루팡” (@bornlupin), 49,268 subscribers as measured 12 November 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/bornlupin.
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.