5 measurements spanning 11 days, net -16. Dots are measurements; the straight line between them is drawn to join them, not to claim we know the path taken in between — snapshots are recorded only when a count changes, so gaps mean “no change observed”, never “interpolated”. The vertical axis spans 3,919–3,944 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded
Measured (UTC)
Subscribers
Change
16 Aug 2026, 18:14
3,925
+3
13 Aug 2026, 11:38
3,922
-4
10 Aug 2026, 11:04
3,926
-9
7 Aug 2026, 02:08
3,935
-6
6 Aug 2026, 04:47
3,941
first reading
Engagement
24 posts held, back to 30 July 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 4 pagesof Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
ERR · 30 days
44.2%
avg views ÷ 3,925 subscribers
Avg views / post
1,730
24 posts measured
Reaction rate
2.74%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
24
of 24 held
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.
What these figures were computed from
Window
Rolling 30 days · latest post in window 7 August 2026
Posts held
24 (30 July 2026 – 7 August 2026)
Views total
41,626
Reactions total
1,139
Forwards / comments
not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken
8 Aug 2026, 05:48 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.
Reaction mix
994 reactions across 20 posts, in 13 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 38.9% of them.
Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
Reaction
Count
Share
Share, drawn
👍
387
38.9%
🔥
170
17.1%
😁
101
10.2%
😎
73
7.34%
✍
67
6.74%
❤
56
5.63%
🤝
47
4.73%
🕊
42
4.23%
👀
28
2.82%
🏆
12
1.21%
💯
6
0.604%
🫡
4
0.402%
👏
1
0.101%
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 24 of the 24 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 1,139reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 24 most recent posts we hold, published 30 July 2026 to 7 August 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.
Ну, и... Пятница отработала свою функцию по назначению
Этот паттерн можно в #учебник_ТА сдавать. Для наглядного примера студентам.
Если за выходные не поступит какого-то очень неожиданно радостного пинка, то следующая неделя уже будет красная.
На этом кураж пока закончился.
=======≈=
Танцовщица так сильно раскрутмлась на шесте, что зрители в зале получили кэш-бэк...
@buratinovsmm
Разовые факторы...
...И так бесконечно,
До ручки, до точки.
И так без конца до конца...
Если вы пролистаете ТГ-канал Центробанка поиском по фразе "Разовые факторы" у вас самопроизвольно на лице сложится вот такая улыбка - 🤪
Вот несколько примеров из последнего:
1⃣ Из решения по ставке 24.07.2026
...Существенный рост цен и повышение инфляционных ожиданий в летние месяцы во многом были связаны с разовыми факторами…
А вот индекс Мосбиржи не самой удачной свечей подошёл к пятнице.
Повисшая звезда...
Ну, это ещё не разворот. Должна последовать свеча - подтверждение. Но пятница со своим фиксажом очень хорошо подходит для формирования такой свечи.
Рисуем...
@buratinovsmm
На следующую неделю в опционах на Si уже заготовили нам вот такую пасхалочку из Коллов на страйк 84000.
Что это по-вашему❓
Голосуем👇
🔥 ‐ Уверенная ставка на рост Si.
Мы все сгорим в этом пожаре.
😎 - Хедж к шорту Si.
Щас ₽ им всем покажет...
#опционы #фьючерсы
@buratinovsmm
Юань второй день подряд не может закрыть над 12,00.
Хотя все предпосылки для этого были.
Обменник на Благодатке - спред всего +0,87р к ЦБ.
У игроков начинают сдавать нервы...
@buratinovsmm
На 6 млрд.руб в день Минфин будет покупать валюту и золото с 7 августа по 4 сентября 2026.
Нефтегазовые доходы лучше плана.
Argus всё врёт про дисконты?
Нет, просто нефти продаётся сильно больше, чем по плану.
@buratinovsmm
-
В продолжение этой темы - О структурном дефиците ликвидности и его влиянии на фондовый рынок и вообще на нашу жизнь...
Собственно, вопрос - И что с этим делать❓
Как выходить из ситуации, как сделать лучше?
=========
Прежде чем начать давать поучения работникам Центробанка ещё раз напоминаю о той Великой миссии, которая (верят в неё или не верят отдельные граждане) настойчиво воплощается в жизнь.
Тот пост был нап…
Негативный сценарий...
Когда мы уже ляжем спать, эта пьеса будет доигрываться.
Самые любопытные зрители могут досмотреть её до конца. Надо закрыть этот спектакль выше 80.
Иначе следующая сцена будет совсем мрачная...
#нефть
@buratinovsmm
Ну, и вот MMI пишет о том же самом
‼️🔥 ПОТРЕБИТЕЛЬСКИЙ БУМ ПРИ ЗАМЕДЛЕНИИ РОСТА ДОХОДОВ
...Почему изменились сберегательные настроения – отдельный вопрос (напишем подробнее). Основная гипотеза - 😱 ДКУ ПРИ ТЕКУЩИХ ИО СТАЛИ СЛИШКОМ МЯГКИМИ. На это указывает и колоссальный отток нала из банков...
В общем, ЦентроПанк за что боролся...
@buratinovsmm
Денег нет.
Но вы держитесь...
Про структурный дефицит ликвидности и его влияние на фондовый рынок.
Поддержу флэшмоб, который запустили коллеги по Структурному дефициту ликвидности в банковском секторе, только я приложу этот свой рассказ, как лопух к своей личной боли - боли опционщика.
Флэшмоб на самом деле запустил сам Центробанк. Обеспокоенный гражданин спросил у Центра, типа:
Чё там за трэш вы устроили в балан…
👍53❤13🔥12👀6🕊5🤝4😁3✍2
Showing the 12 most recent of 24 posts we hold for @buratinovsmm. 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 — 424,092 of 1,548,671entries 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.
Mentions
Named by 11 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.
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
@buratinovsmm 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.
@buratinovsm 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 16 August 2026 — this
entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“Буратино vs МаркетМейкер” (@buratinovsmm), 3,925 subscribers as measured 16 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/buratinovsmm.
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.