3 measurements spanning 22 days, net -3. 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 509–512 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded
Measured (UTC)
Subscribers
Change
28 Aug 2026, 18:04
509
-3
7 Aug 2026, 05:46
512
no change
7 Aug 2026, 05:33
512
first reading
Engagement
19 posts held, back to 10 April 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 1 pageof Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
ERR · 30 days
10.0%
avg views ÷ 509 subscribers
Avg views / post
51.0
1 post measured
Reaction rate
17.6%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
1
of 19 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 2 August 2026
Posts held
19 (10 April 2026 – 2 August 2026)
Views total
51
Reactions total
9
Forwards / comments
not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken
7 Aug 2026, 05:46 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
192 reactions across 16 posts, in 7 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 40.1% of them.
Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
Reaction
Count
Share
Share, drawn
❤
77
40.1%
👍
52
27.1%
🔥
31
16.1%
😁
11
5.73%
custom 5343642445320045074
10
5.21%
custom 5334977365980236304
7
3.65%
👎
4
2.08%
Custom emoji. 2 of the rows above are Telegram custom emoji, which the public preview renders as an element carrying only a numeric id — no character, and no image we can reach. The id is printed as-is rather than substituted with a look-alike glyph, because a stand-in would be our invention showing where a measurement should be. The counts beside them areTelegram’s.
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 16 of the 19 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 192reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 19 most recent posts we hold, published 10 April 2026 to 2 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.
Большинство компаний ошибочно думают, что достаточно добавить спецэффекты, AR/VR или красивые декорации.
Но клиенты чувствуют себя "погружёнными" только тогда, когда их мозг последовательно отвечает на шесть вопросов:
Where am I?
Who am I with?
What can I do?
What is happening?
Am I making progress?
Why does this matter?
✍Авторы статьи HBR предлагают универсальную модель, которую можно применять к маркетингу, обуч…
делюсь полезной подборкой для тех, кто хочет развивать Business English самостоятельно. В своём Instagram*
🔗ссылка
Внутри — 15 англоязычных ресурсов, которые я сама использую: YouTube-каналы, подкасты и онлайн-издания. Именно на их основе я составляю уроки, ищу материалы для учеников и вдохновляюсь на многие посты здесь, в Telegram.
Если вам интересно не только учить английский, но и читать про бизнес, маркетинг, …
AI умеет переводить почти идеально? Чего бояться?
(Ничего)
Очень порадовала меня статья TIME, вот выжимка мыслей:
AI не делает изучение языка менее ценным.
Он делает простое знание слов менее ценным.
🤩 Теперь ценность не в том, что ты умеешь перевести письмо, а в том, что ты могёшь без "посредника":
• выстраивать доверие;
• чувствовать юмор, иронию и подтекст;
• быстро думать во время встречи;
• понимать, как ду…
на самом деле, to call the shots — значит:
принимать решения, определять курс, быть тем, у кого последнее слово.
Например:
💼 The CEO calls the shots on major investments.
— Генеральный директор принимает решения по крупным инвестициям.
💼 I don't call the shots here. You'll need to ask my manager.
— Я здесь ничего не решаю. Вам лучше спросить моего менеджера.
💼 Who calls the shots on this project?
— Кто принимает к…
удивительную вещь услышала я от студента-продакта:
«У меня есть ментор, но outside the company. Я к нему хожу за ростом...» - не дословно, но мысль понятна (он дизайнит)
Мы привыкли говорить, что сильные специалисты ценят свободу. Не любят микроменеджмент. Хотят автономии. И это правда.
Но, оказывается, свобода не отменяет потребность в наставнике.
Даже опытные продакты, дизайнеры и другие специалисты идут к exte…
Три ошибки, которые удивительно часто повторялись на занятиях в последние недели 💻
❌ provide with information
✅ provide someone with information / provide information
❌ persons
✅ people (в большинстве обычных ситуаций)
❌ face with difficulties
✅ face difficulties / be faced with difficulties
Почему так происходит?
Когда мозг запомнил только перевод слова, кажется, что provide = предоставлять, person = человек, f…
На одном из уроков со студенткой уровня B1 случился оч показательный момент.
В предложении прозвучало слово *worse*, но она четко слышала *worth*, и не могла понять, что я от нее хочу, собственно 😬
Почему? Рассуждаю я...
При этом *worth it* она знает отлично — оно закреплено как частотное выражение, живое, узнаваемое.
А вот *worse* (из базовой цепочки bad → worse → the worst) оказалось менее автоматизированным и …
“Feedback is a one-way street” — когда один человек говорит, а второй только слушает.
Без диалога, без вопросов, без возможности что-то уточнить или обсудить.
Такой feedback часто выглядит как:
— You need to be more professional
— This presentation wasn’t clear enough. Redo it by tomorrow
И всё.
Вроде бы feedback есть.
Но не объясняют:
что именно было не так,
как это исправить,
почему возникла проблема,
и что дума…
Дело не в кофемашине на кухне офиса... Работникам по всему миру (от инженеров до поваров) — нужно примерно одно и то же для счастья:
🎞️Trust & Respect — доверие и уважение
Когда тебе не нужно проходить 15 согласований ради одного ноутбука, а руководитель реально доверяет твоим решениям.
🎞️Fairness — справедливость
Люди очень остро чувствуют, когда к кому-то относятся “по-другому”. Прозрачность и равное отношение с…
👍5🔥3❤2custom 53436424453200450741
Showing the 12 most recent of 19 posts we hold for @suharidari. 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 2 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.
что звучит эффективнее? используй language intuition 💭
Feedback is a one-way street25%
Feedback is a two-way street75%
Shares as published. 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 19 most recent posts we hold, published 10 April 2026 to 2 August 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.
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 28 August 2026 — this
entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“английский для деловых • suharidari” (@suharidari), 509 subscribers as measured 28 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/suharidari.
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.
