Marketing & affiliate — a classification, not a measurement. An on-box language model (Qwen3.6-35B-A3B-FP8, prompt version 1) read this channel’s own recent posts on 9 September 2026 and assigned it the closest of 31 fixed categories, at 51% confidence. This is a model’s judgement about what the channel is likely to be about, not a fact this register measured the way a subscriber count or a view count is measured — it can be revised on a later pass, and it carries no weight anywhere else on this page. How this classification works, and why it has no browse page of its own yet.
Observations
These are measurements, not verdicts. Each one below states something we counted, alongside the evidence it was counted from, so you can check it rather than take it. None of them is graded: every observation this register holds is recorded at severity 0, because the precision of the detectors behind them has not been measured yet, and a rating we cannot support is worse than none. Read each as a fact about the data, not as a judgement about the channel. How we measure.
Views per post sit far above this size band
76,100 average views per post against 79,944 subscribers — an engagement rate of 95.1%. Across the 8,277 registered channels in the same cohort — 31,626–99,996 subscribers, posting mainly in Russian — the middle half sit between 5.06% and 20.7%, with a median of 10.4%.
What this was computed from
Window
30 days (24 September 2026 – 24 October 2026)
Posts measured
12 of 12 published in the window (0 exact, 12 rounded by Telegram)
Views totalled
912,700
Mature posts only
95.1% over 12 posts read at least 24h after publication
When this is recorded. A channel is listed here only when its engagement rate sits at or above the 99th percentile of its cohort and is at least 3× away from that cohort’s median — above it — on both the all-readings figure and the mature-only figure. The percentile alone would be circular: a percentile cut puts the same share of every cohort in the tail whatever the data looks like. The distance from the median is what makes it a statement about this channel.
This is not a verdict, and the direction is not a quality signal. A low rate has many innocent causes — audiences that read in the Telegram app without opening the channel, a subscriber base built long before the current output, an audience in a different timezone from our reading. A high rate has innocent causes too: a post that travelled far beyond the channel’s own subscribers will do it. We publish the measurement and the distribution it sits in. The full cohort baselines are downloadable, so this comparison can be reproduced rather than trusted.
Recorded under the key err_high, last confirmed 24 October 2026. An observation that a later pass no longer finds is cleared, and a cleared observation is removed from this page rather than being shown struck through — we do not keep publishing a claim we have withdrawn. Dispute an observation.
Growth
47 measurements spanning 78 days, net +23,262. 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 53,193–83,433 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded, most recent 20 of 47
Measured (UTC)
Subscribers
Change
24 Oct 2026, 14:16
79,944
+298
23 Oct 2026, 10:54
79,646
+310
22 Oct 2026, 11:06
79,336
+665
21 Oct 2026, 07:21
78,671
+248
20 Oct 2026, 06:27
78,423
+280
19 Oct 2026, 09:15
78,143
+372
18 Oct 2026, 06:27
77,771
+263
17 Oct 2026, 08:41
77,508
+481
16 Oct 2026, 06:20
77,027
+396
15 Oct 2026, 02:47
76,631
+377
13 Oct 2026, 22:41
76,254
+1,549
10 Oct 2026, 19:18
74,705
+1,570
6 Oct 2026, 18:20
73,135
+1,465
1 Oct 2026, 17:57
71,670
+5,904
18 Sept 2026, 13:41
65,766
+1,649
16 Sept 2026, 09:36
64,117
+1,099
14 Sept 2026, 16:38
63,018
+1,361
12 Sept 2026, 23:58
61,657
+518
11 Sept 2026, 01:56
61,139
+704
8 Sept 2026, 01:01
60,435
first reading
Engagement
106 posts held, back to 29 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 168 pages of Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
ERR · 30 days
86.2%
avg views ÷ 79,944 subscribers
Avg views / post
68,900
14 posts measured
Reaction rate
1.49%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
14
of 106 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 24 October 2026
Posts held
106 (29 July 2026 – 24 October 2026)
Views total
964,900
Reactions total
14,343
Forwards / comments
not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken
24 Oct 2026, 23:29 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.
What this channel posts
Photos
297
Videos
20
Links
49
Lifetime counters from Telegram’s own channel header, read 24 October 2026 — not the date at the top of this page, which is when the subscriber count was last read. Below Telegram’s rounding threshold, so these counts are exact.
Video runtime
1m 09s
Average length
17s
Measured directly from 4 videos 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
51,904 reactions across 106 posts, in 1 kind.
Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
Reaction
Count
Share
Share, drawn
custom 5433985342929668400
51,904
100.0%
Custom emoji. One row above is a 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 count beside it is Telegram’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 106 of the 106 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 51,904 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 106 most recent posts we hold, published 29 July 2026 to 24 October 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
2,359
across the posts below
Posts paid on
102
of 106 we hold a reading for · 96%
Most on one post
328
single highest reading
A paid reaction is a reader spending Telegram Stars — bought with money — on a post by @eldarmamaev. 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 106 most recent posts we hold for this entry, published 29 July 2026 to 24 October 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 Яндекс Пэй не могут назвать сроки восстановления сервиса
Деньги россиян находятся в безопасности, но точных сроков восстановления сейчас никто не знает, объяснил глава финтех-направления Яндекса.
Сервис недоступен уже более 18 часов. Пользователи не могут воспользоваться деньгами. Он перестал работать сегодня ночью.
яндекс, имейте совесть.
https://shop.wayfs.app
партия ограниченная, много не отшил, не хочу масс продукт, так что успевайте
custom 5433985342929668400568
Showing the 12 most recent of 106 posts we hold for @eldarmamaev. 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.
Forward network
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.
Mentions
Names
Channels on the register whose handles appear in this channel's posts.
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.
Handles this channel named that no longer answer
Dead references
1
handles named in this channel’s posts, vacant today
Evidenced gone
1
we ourselves saw one of these resolve, at some point
Never seen alive
0
vacant every time we have ever looked
@eldarmamaev 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.
Evidenced gone
We ourselves saw each of these resolve to a real page at some point before it went vacant — a genuine, evidenced change, not an inference from absence.
@miskreserve1 named in 1 post, 18 August 2026 – 18 August 2026 · confirmed gone 14 October 2026 (two independent sightings — see how we confirm a dead handle)evidenced
Channels Telegram recommends alongside this one
Telegram’s own answer, not this register’s. When this register asks Telegram’s API what is similar to this channel, this is the list it returns, in the exact order Telegram returns it — never re-sorted by subscribers or by anything else this register measures. The relationship, and the order, are Telegram’s; we record them and date them, and make no claim of our own about which of these channels actually resemble this one.
Read from Telegram’s recommendation API, most recently 23 August 2026. Telegram holds a list like this for a small and growing share of the register — how this is measured, and why most channel pages show nothing here.
Appears in Telegram’s recommendations for other channels
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 — 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 else’s query is independent of having been queried itself.
Gadji Gadjiev @gadji_gadjiewww · 30,298 Telegram ranks this channel #24 of 37 here — alongside 36 others — read 7 September 2026
MAJORKA @majorka_private_tg · 70,887 Telegram ranks this channel #29 of 50 here — alongside 49 others — read 20 August 2026
Питупи @mediap2p · 89,765 Telegram ranks this channel #45 of 65 here — alongside 64 others — read 17 August 2026
ДТП/ЧП 05 @dtpchp_dag · 43,228 Telegram ranks this channel #59 of 59 here — alongside 58 others — read 28 August 2026
This channel appears in 4 seed channels' Telegram-generated recommendation lists in total. Each is Telegram’s list for THAT channel, not this one — see how this is measured.
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 24 October 2026 — this
entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“Арбитражник с авито” (@eldarmamaev), 79,944 subscribers as measured 24 October 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/eldarmamaev.
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.
