Channel
@wdgann432
On this record: Growth · Engagement · Reactions · Posts · Citations · Cite this entry
2,293subscribers
+3 since we began measuring on 7 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 1,000–3,162.
| Telegram ID | -1002232212715 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @wdgann432 |
| Created | Between 1 June 2024 and 30 September 2024— estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated. |
| First recorded | 7 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 16 August 2026 |
| Measurements held | 4 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 2 times, most recently 16 August 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/wdgann432 |
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 13 Aug 2026, 12:19 | 2,293 | +1 |
| 10 Aug 2026, 17:16 | 2,292 | +2 |
| 7 Aug 2026, 20:18 | 2,290 | no change |
| 7 Aug 2026, 19:28 | 2,290 | first reading |
19 posts held, back to 1 August 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 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.
| Window | Rolling 30 days · latest post in window 7 August 2026 |
|---|---|
| Posts held | 19 (1 August 2026 – 7 August 2026) |
| Views total | 21,697 |
| Reactions total | 332 |
| Forwards / comments | not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated |
| Readings taken | 7 Aug 2026, 20:18 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.
332 reactions across 14 posts, in 7 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 79.8% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| 👍 | 265 | 79.8% | |
| ❤ | 33 | 9.94% | |
| 🔥 | 23 | 6.93% | |
| 💯 | 6 | 1.81% | |
| ⚡ | 2 | 0.602% | |
| 🏆 | 2 | 0.602% | |
| 👏 | 1 | 0.301% |
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 14 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 332reactions 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 1 August 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.
Jessie Livermore book he wrote in 1940. You see similar things to Gann's rules, sell at new lows, buy at new highs etc. https://ia903105.us.archive.org/34/items/bd_01_20171101/Jesse_Livermore-How_To_Trade_In_Stocks_%281940_original%29-EN_text.pdf
👍6🏆1🔥1
Jessie Livermore was a one of the greatest stock traders, went broke a few times and committed suicide in 1940. Gann lent him a million dollars one year after he went broke to start trading again. He had two big problems was one his position was way to big on each trade and dint save enough money out of each trade. This is called EGO, no different buying more and more farms, then a seven year drought hits, 10 times w…
👍8🏆1👏1💯1
Once you have knowledge of cycles you will have patience with investments an weather. Amazing how 99% of farmers cant make money out of droughts, its because they did the same thing as the last drought. HOPED FOR RAIN, that's not a business plan. HOPE will never work, only knowledge.
👍13❤6
The difference between being rich and poor, the rich change their mind quicker, the poor hold until its a disaster. Gann said " If you don't change your mind, you have no change tom mind". He also said "If you can see black clouds, you know a storm is coming". If nothing adds up, it doesn't add up. The rich have started to leave the west a few years ago or a least move money from assets that fund socialism.
👍40❤8
Inflation is way higher than this as it needs to be compounded. If we take the low in oil in 1986 at $10.40 a barrel, compound it at 15% ( really should be 45% because when a $1 is spent it goes 9 fold). So I'm using 5% x 3 at the extreme low and its 2,800% to 2026. The middle price of oil is $74. They level nearly everything out of the inflation index, taxes, power, council rates, insurance, maintenance and interes…
👍26❤1
W.D.Gann Trader pinned a photo
This why people cant make money. They cant use a $20 calculator, they don't understand compounding money and they have debt, you cant compound money with debt. You can compound it faster if you use the cycles and can follow rules. If you bought the D.J.I.A at 386 in 1929, it didn't go past this top until 1955. Didn't get to 1,400 until 1986. Means you have lost all you money compounding at 5%, plus you are dead if yo…
👍15
W.D.Gann Trader pinned a photo
The CRB index is how you follow economics, real estate, cash, stock and commodities is what you need to learn. My long term things i have done are in the above chart. Most people married to what they like, I don't like any markets, they are just all markets and you have to change with the trends of cycles. You will never make money buying and holding for ever, that's a stupid idea.
👍27🔥3❤2
https://youtu.be/j6gWUfGFL5E?si=k7I-aKb9Z95qtSSU
👍14❤5💯2
Counting weekly sunspots using 144 over wheat chart.
👍18🔥3⚡2❤2
W.D.Gann Trader pinned «Most people aren't following what is going on long term and your wealth is heading down the same track as it did in the past and especially in the western world where printing is out of control. Remember they told you, you will own nothing and be happy by…»
Showing the 12 most recent of 19 posts we hold for @wdgann432. 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 — 1,339,738 of 1,481,306entries 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.
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.
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 13 August 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“W.D.Gann Trader” (@wdgann432), 2,293 subscribers as measured 13 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/wdgann432.
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.