27M -> 1.7B in 2 months bring back the good old days
β€50π₯13π12π5π’2β€βπ₯1π1

Channel
@jamiescave
On this record: Growth Β· Engagement Β· What this channel posts Β· Reactions Β· Posts Β· Citations Β· Telegram's recommendations Β· Cite this entry
13,614subscribers
+0 since we began measuring on 6 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register Β· movement among entries of 10,000β31,623.
| Telegram ID | -1001686794412 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @jamiescave |
| Description | Channel where i disclose all my plays , research and advice NFA. https://twitter.com/cryptojamie7 DM for enquires/marketing/advisory : @jamiewagmi1 |
| Created | Between 1 December 2021 and 31 March 2023β estimated from Telegramβs id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated. |
| First recorded | 6 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 12 August 2026 |
| Measurements held | 7 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 1 time, most recently 12 August 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/jamiescave |
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 12 Aug 2026, 03:12 | 13,614 | -7 |
| 11 Aug 2026, 02:44 | 13,621 | -6 |
| 10 Aug 2026, 00:02 | 13,627 | +4 |
| 9 Aug 2026, 00:51 | 13,623 | +11 |
| 7 Aug 2026, 22:11 | 13,612 | -2 |
| 6 Aug 2026, 22:23 | 13,614 | no change |
| 6 Aug 2026, 20:47 | 13,614 | first reading |
20 posts held, back to 9 July 2025 β the reader has not yet reached the start of this channelβs public history, so older posts may sit further back, unread. Read across 17 pagesof Telegramβs 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) Γ· viewsβ note the denominator is views, not subscribers. Telegramβs 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.
| Window | Rolling 30 days Β· latest post in window 15 July 2026 |
|---|---|
| Posts held | 20 (9 July 2025 β 15 July 2026) |
| Views total | 8,740 |
| Reactions total | 133 |
| Forwards / comments | not exposed by the public surface β not measured, not estimated |
| Readings taken | 13 Aug 2026, 02:28 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 βcorrectingβ the number into something nobody can reproduce.
Precision. Telegram publishes view counts on its public widget in short form β 8.12K, 3.7M β 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 β read a large reaction total as three significant figures per contributing emoji rather than as the figure it prints.
Lifetime counters from Telegramβs own channel header, read 13 August 2026 β not the date at the top of this page, which is when the subscriber count was last read. A count marked β was rounded by Telegram before we ever saw it β t.me prints these counters in full below 1,000 and to three significant figures above, so β142,000 means somewhere between 141,500 and 142,499.
1,012 reactions across 20 posts, in 24 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 50.8% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| β€ | 514 | 50.8% | |
| π₯ | 254 | 25.1% | |
| π€£ | 91 | 8.99% | |
| π | 25 | 2.47% | |
| π | 24 | 2.37% | |
| π€ | 23 | 2.27% | |
| π’ | 16 | 1.58% | |
| π― | 13 | 1.28% | |
| π | 9 | 0.889% | |
| π | 8 | 0.791% | |
| π€ͺ | 7 | 0.692% | |
| π³ | 6 | 0.593% | |
| π«‘ | 4 | 0.395% | |
| β | 3 | 0.296% | |
| π | 3 | 0.296% | |
| π± | 3 | 0.296% | |
| π | 2 | 0.198% | |
| β€βπ₯ | 1 | 0.099% | |
| π | 1 | 0.099% | |
| π | 1 | 0.099% | |
| 4 further kinds | 4 | 0.395% |
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 β π is thanks in one channel and mourning in another β 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 β 4.34K, 1.2M β 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 20 of the 20 sampled posts in this sample. Summed by Telegramβs own count on each post β not by adding up the per-emoji breakdown above β those same posts carry 1,012reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by βa reaction total printed elsewhere on the pageβ.
Measured over the 20 most recent posts we hold, published 9 July 2025 to 15 July 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.
27M -> 1.7B in 2 months bring back the good old days
β€50π₯13π12π5π’2β€βπ₯1π1
Bear market is always deep PVP which is why i avoided shilling anything new this year Bad conditions seem to be coming to a close Good conditions are on the horizon https://x.com/cryptojamie7/status/2077204571244335553?s=20
β€38π₯8π±3
https://x.com/KeetaNetwork/status/2064306199420391771?s=20 Very significant partnership for $KTA XRP 2.0 in the making
π€£71π₯20β€14π12
https://x.com/cryptojamie7/status/2013245667695604196?s=46&t=YQgvXL-K9Mp_iDPNYLPDLg Value supercycle incoming Trenchers -> researchers
β€23π₯10π8β3π1
https://x.com/cryptojamie7/status/1980767406751400159?s=46&t=YQgvXL-K9Mp_iDPNYLPDLg 200k -> 4.1m Volatility has been great this week Onto the next
π₯56β€13π«‘4π€£1π€―1
https://x.com/cryptojamie7/status/1980635863534239760 You do not own enough $KTA
β€21π₯5π―4π3π1
https://x.com/cryptojamie7/status/1979929251114524891?s=46&t=YQgvXL-K9Mp_iDPNYLPDLg Opening 30 spots Free
π₯48β€16π4π1
https://x.com/cryptojamie7/status/1977990319242133766?s=46&t=YQgvXL-K9Mp_iDPNYLPDLg
β€28
This dump is literally a rug Donβt make any emotional decisions Hope everyone is okay
β€77π’14π₯7π€6π€£6π―5
https://x.com/cryptojamie7/status/1971955064588706219?s=46&t=YQgvXL-K9Mp_iDPNYLPDLg Thoughts on the perp dex meta, this is the best narrative degens have had in a long time Something that actually generates $ to make it sustainable instead of trusting random anon devs incentivised to steal all your $
β€25
https://x.com/cryptojamie7/status/1969827332798955697?s=46&t=YQgvXL-K9Mp_iDPNYLPDLg Mainnet is in 3 days thought it would be good to do an updated thesis post Mainnet is just the beginning, this is where the real money comes in Road to 100B
β€30π13π₯9π3π€£3
https://x.com/cryptojamie7/status/1964196611107508297?s=46&t=YQgvXL-K9Mp_iDPNYLPDLg Coinbase just listed $KTA Next leg starting
β€22π₯10
Showing the 12 most recent of 20 posts we hold for @jamiescave. 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 β was rounded by Telegram before we ever saw it β t.me prints views in full below 1,000 and to three significant figures above, so β1,200,000 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 β 404,102 of 1,151,006entries in the measured graph. A weighted position computed from the forward and mention edges below β republished posts weigh more than named mentions β 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 channelβs 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 β a named-by count costs nothing to manufacture. The top 100 by this measure, or how it is computed.
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.
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 β 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 elseβs query is independent of having been queried itself.
This channel appears in 3 seed channels' Telegram-generated recommendation lists in total. Each is Telegramβs list for THAT channel, not this one β 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 August 2026 β this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
βJamie's Caveπ¨π»βπ»β (@jamiescave), 13,614 subscribers as measured 12 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/jamiescave.
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 Β· 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.