4 measurements spanning 23 days, net -2. 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 605–607 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded
Measured (UTC)
Subscribers
Change
30 Aug 2026, 20:18
605
-1
23 Aug 2026, 13:54
606
-1
8 Aug 2026, 03:04
607
no change
7 Aug 2026, 13:34
607
first reading
Engagement
15 posts held, back to 16 December 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 1 page of 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 15 posts for this entry, the most recent from 18 June 2026. An engagement rate over an empty window would be a number about nothing.
What this channel posts
Video runtime
5s
Average length
5s
Measured directly from 1 video 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.
Reaction mix
129 reactions across 11 posts, in 5 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 37.2% of them.
Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
Reaction
Count
Share
Share, drawn
🔥
48
37.2%
👍
36
27.9%
❤
21
16.3%
🤔
17
13.2%
😁
7
5.43%
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 11 of the 15 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 129 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 15 most recent posts we hold, published 16 December 2025 to 18 June 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 Stars
Stars received
9
across the posts below
Posts paid on
2
of 15 we hold a reading for · 13%
Most on one post
8
single highest reading
A paid reaction is a reader spending Telegram Stars — bought with money — on a post by @egor_ivanskii. Telegram publishes the count on the public post preview alongside ordinary reactions, and this register reads it there. It is the only figure on this site that measures money moving rather than attention.
Stars are not reactions, and the two are never added. They are rendered in the same strip on Telegram and counted in the same shape, but one is a tap and the other is a purchase. The reaction totals and the engagement rate elsewhere on this page exclude every figure in this section, and no rate here is computed against a reaction count.
This is not revenue, and we publish no currency figure. What a Star costs a reader and what it pays a channel are different numbers, Telegram takes a share we cannot observe, and the terms have changed. Converting a Star count into money would be an estimate dressed as a measurement, so the count is where we stop.
Counted over the 15 most recent posts we hold for this entry, published 16 December 2025 to 18 June 2026. Star counts above 1,000 reach us in Telegram’s short form and carry the same three-significant-figure rounding as everything else on this page.
В двух словах, как кризис в РФ повлиял на нашу команду.
В последние несколько лет я углубился только в одну нишу и работал с недвижимостью. Мы привлекали клиентов на покупку недвижимости агентствам и застройщикам из РФ, Дубая, Таиланда и получали комиссию от продаж.
С сентября по декабрь 2025г. наш доход с каждым месяцем падал. Я смотрел на чистую прибыль и понимал, что такой залупой мне заниматься дальше не хочетс…
Небольшой влог моего товарища и партнера вышел у него на канале про Бали.
Мы в путешествие гоняли, и прям чудесно получилось. Оставлю ссылочку
https://youtu.be/ZKAPiSaX7ow?si=LPyYrg1N0HlkLGzp
«Самолет» идет на посадку)) Крупнейший застройщик страны - ГК «Самолет» -официально попросил у правительства 50 млрд рублей.
Ситуация классическая: набрали долгов на десятки миллиардов под плавающие ставки, а продажи встали. Ипотека под 20% сделала свое дело. Теперь компания платит банкам по процентам больше, чем зарабатывает на стройке.
И тут важно понимать: «Самолет» - это не просто отдельный кейс, это лакмусовая…
Вот какой источник привлечения новых клиентов в недвижке будет актуален в 2026 году
Маркировка рекламы и растущие ставки превратили аукцион за клиента в битву бюджетов.
С учетом экономического кризиса в нише бюджеты на маркетинг пришлось существенно сократить.
Трендом 2025-2026 стал переход на партнерские сети. Это дешевле, лояльнее и зачастую быстрее.
Механика простая: агенты обмениваются клиентами. Если ваш поку…
Решил посчитать сколько отказов я получил в 2025 году, и вот что из этого вышло 👇
🔹3 000 касаний с агентствами недвижимости, застройщиками и брокерами я вместе с нашей командой совершил;
🔹700 отказов получили на наши различные офферы;
🔹250 звонков с различными компаниями я с командой провел, и 85% из них нам дали отказ;
🔹1 выгорание у меня было, и то оно мне понравилось 🫶😅;
🔹800 моих личных часов, вложенных в со…
Почему с тобой не «мэтчатся» богатые клиенты?
В какой-то момент я разочаровался в тиндере. Я был уверен: сайты знакомств - это полная херня и пустая трата времени. У меня там висели фотографии, сделанные «на коленке», непонятно зачем и в каких условиях. И результат был соответствующий: мэтчи случались только с девушками, которые меня вообще не привлекали. Я смотрел на экран и не понимал, почему в жизни меня окружают…
Showing the 12 most recent of 15 posts we hold for @egor_ivanskii. 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.
Polls
The 3 polls we hold for this entry, as Telegram rendered them when we read the post. A poll’s figures keep moving after that, so each one is dated.
Брокеры, вопрос к вам: Кто хочет начать работать с сегментом выше? С более высокими чеками и интересными клиентами ?
Нет, нравится сегмент с которым сейчас работаю0%
Shares as published, totalling 0%. No per-option vote count is published by Telegram, so none is shown.
Percentages only — there are no per-option vote counts here, because Telegram publishes none. The public post preview gives each option’s share and a single voter total, and nothing else. Multiplying one by the other would produce a per-option tally that looks measured and is not: the shares are rounded to whole numbers before we ever see them. We print what was published and leave the column that does not exist empty.
The shares need not add up to 100. Rounding alone puts many polls at 99 or 101. A poll that allows more than one answer per voter runs well past 100 by design, and several here do. The bars are drawn against a fixed 100% track at each option’s own percentage rather than normalised to the total, so a poll that exceeds it shows that it does instead of being quietly rescaled.
Read from the 15 most recent posts we hold, published 16 December 2025 to 18 June 2026. Telegram labels each poll by kind — an anonymous poll, a quiz, a closed set of final results — and that label is reproduced rather than paraphrased.
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
@egor_ivanskii 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.
@realskii named in 1 post, 9 August 2026 – 9 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 30 August 2026 — this
entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“Иванский про рекламу” (@egor_ivanskii), 605 subscribers as measured 30 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/egor_ivanskii.
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.