3 measurements spanning 4 days. 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 2,184–2,185 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded
Measured (UTC)
Subscribers
Change
10 Aug 2026, 17:11
2,185
+1
7 Aug 2026, 08:37
2,184
-1
6 Aug 2026, 11:21
2,185
first reading
Engagement
17 posts held, back to 17 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 2 pagesof Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
ERR · 30 days
29.8%
avg views ÷ 2,185 subscribers
Avg views / post
651
17 posts measured
Reaction rate
3.91%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
17
of 17 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
17 (17 July 2026 – 7 August 2026)
Views total
11,068
Reactions total
433
Forwards / comments
not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken
7 Aug 2026, 16:52 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
433 reactions across 17 posts, in 15 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 43.6% of them.
Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
Reaction
Count
Share
Share, drawn
🔥
189
43.6%
❤
100
23.1%
💯
42
9.70%
🤣
39
9.01%
😍
16
3.70%
👍
10
2.31%
⚡
9
2.08%
❤🔥
7
1.62%
🐳
5
1.15%
😎
4
0.924%
🙏
4
0.924%
👌
3
0.693%
🦄
3
0.693%
🌭
1
0.231%
🤩
1
0.231%
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 17 of the 17 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 433reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 17 most recent posts we hold, published 17 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.
Telegram Stars
Stars received
4
across the posts below
Posts paid on
4
of 17 we hold a reading for · 24%
Most on one post
1
single highest reading
A paid reaction is a reader spending Telegram Stars — bought with money — on a post by @flamingofactor. 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 17 most recent posts we hold for this entry, published 17 July 2026 to 7 August 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.
✅ Стоимость произведения искусства не складывается из стоимости красок и холста.
❌ Никто не обязан платить вашу цену только потому, что у вас высокая себестоимость.
Две разнонаправленные мысли о которых я хочу сегодня (нашла время в пятницу вечером 🤣) поразмышлять в разрезе объектов гостеприимства.
Чем раньше вы начнете создавать собственное произведение искусства (а это про:
🦩историю проекта;
🦩смыслы и ценности, …
Ну вы понимаете, у нас много народа, мы не справляемся!
Фраза, которая убивает меня даже больше, чем «ну он же новенький» и «я вас услышала».
Выходит, что проект рассчитан не на ситуацию, когда есть покупатели, а на сценарий когда их нет 🤪
Качество сервиса измеряется не когда пришло три гостя и все бросились к ним; а в пиковую нагрузку.
Если вы не готовы к пиковой нагрузке, то автоматом, просто на уровне подсозна…
Подарочный сертификат - самая удачная точка входа нового клиента:
🦩 привлечение такого клиента не стоит вам ничего - решение о покупке принял уже лояльный вам покупатель.
🦩 раз это подарок от кого-то хоть в какой-то степени близкого, доверие к бренду формируется автоматом.
Выходит, что сам подарочный сертификат - это (часто) первое знакомство с брендом и тут может быть два пути: wow-впечатление или что-то как у всех…
Деньги из воздуха
Ванна в отеле явление частое, а вот правильный апселлинг этого предмета большая редкость.
Делать его с таким коэффициентом наценки - отдельное мастерство, но начать можно и с более скромных решений 😉
Развлеку вас немножко 🙈
Так по мнению то ли приложения Hotbot, то ли по версии отеля, который им пользуется, звучит «Хреновуха» в английской версии событий.
Дайте парочку 🤣
🤣
Моя любимая тема про «денег нет».
Открыла утро в Нижнем попыткой завтрака:
Заведение #1. Загрузка около 60 процентов. Официанты сонные мухи. Первое, что тебе сообщают - повышенное время ожидания- 45 минут.
-> люди уходят, потеря выручки
🦩 выводим дополнительного повара на утреннюю смену. Работаем с персоналом, что любого усаживаем и начинаем с напитков и витрины (за баром никакой запары нет и в помине).
-> рост вы…
На той неделе мы с вами собирали 🔥 в поддержку кино-туризма, одного из важных трендов последнего времени.
Давайте превратим идею в план действий:
🦩 Соберите список с адресами знаковых мест и приложите фото из фильма и с реальных мест событий.
🦩 Проанализируйте, что и где ели (и, возможно, пили) герои. Если это реальные заведения - отлично. Если нет, цепляйтесь за блюда и ищите аналоги. На днях в Иркутске наткнулась …
На тренинге в Иркутске родилось новое название для сбора гостевых данных в CRM систему - ИСТОРИЯ ЛЮБВИ.
🦩Теперь не заносим данные в программу, в пишем нашу историю любви с гостем.
🦩 Теперь не проверяем данные, а заглядываем в историю любви.
Как в любой подобной истории там могут быть и взлеты, и падения; попадания точно в цель и промахи. Знать, что гость не любит возможно даже важнее, чем знания о его предпочтения…
Стала дарить подарки (практичные) любимым отелям - коврики для йоги. За последние полгода - это уже третий.
Если останавливаюсь на несколько дней, заказываю доставку в пункт выдачи, а потом оставляю отелю с надежой вернуться)
В подарке, конечно, намек, что йога-мат в номере уже стал необходимым минимумом)
Про самых недолюбленных гостей.
Вчера на тренинге по гостеприимству в который раз для персонала стало шоком, что самые лояльные гости получают меньше всех внимания.
Мы носимся с клиентами-террористами.
Мы из кожи вон лезем для привлечения новых клиентов.
Мы дарим «пироги» за косяки.
Но даже элементарная фраза «вам как обычно?» дается индустрии гостеприимства с огромным трудом.
Тем временем, постоянные лояльные го…
Вот кстати по теме комплиментов утащила у Романа Лошманова.
Я все понимаю про документы и прочую бюрократию для отеля, но чертовски круто такой комплимент получить!
😍7🔥4👍1
Showing the 12 most recent of 17 posts we hold for @flamingofactor. 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.
Stars beside a post are paid reactions — Telegram Stars, bought with money and spent on that post. They are a different unit from reactions and are never added to them, here or anywhere else on this page.
Citation-graph rank
Citation-graph rank — 379,883 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.
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.
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.
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 10 August 2026 — this
entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“ФЛАМИНГО ФАКТОР с Полиной Пушкиной” (@flamingofactor), 2,185 subscribers as measured 10 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/flamingofactor.
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.