●현재 미장 시총 상위 200위 중 • 3% 이상 상승 종목 - 엔비디아, 델테크놀로지 • 3% 이상 하락 종목 - 팔란티어, 팔로 알토, 크라우드 스트라이크, 서비스나우, 포티넷, 스노우플레이크, 클라우드플레어 => 그동안의 시장 흐름과 확연하게 달라진 모습
🤔4🤡2❤1

Channel
@triple_stock
On this record: Topic · Observations · Also posting the same content · Growth · Engagement · Reactions · Posts · Citations · Handles named that no longer answer · Telegram's recommendations · Cite this entry
12,879subscribers
+241 since we began measuring on 7 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 10,000–31,623.
| Telegram ID | -1001603630466 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @triple_stock |
| Created | 10 February 2022 — measured — cross-checked against a third-party dataset (ext.tg_channel) |
| First recorded | 7 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 17 September 2026 |
| Measurements held | 28 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 1 time, most recently 17 September 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/triple_stock |
Crypto & trading — a classification, not a measurement. An on-box language model (Qwen3.6-35B-A3B-UD-Q6_K_XL, prompt version 1) read this channel’s own recent posts on 10 August 2026 and assigned it the closest of 31 fixed categories, at 71% 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.
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.
Posts published here appear word for word on 1 other registered channel. The matching is on the text itself, not on Telegram’s forward marker, so it finds a copy whether or not it was labelled as one.
| Posted first | Then | Overlap | Gap |
|---|---|---|---|
| @triple_stock/16742 · this entry4 Aug 2026, 22:55 UTC | @cahier_de_market/103664 Aug 2026, 22:58 UTC | 1.00 | 3 minutes |
| Channel | Matching posts | Text overlap | Typical gap | Published first |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| @cahier_de_market | 5 (5/5 hand-verifiable sample passed) | 1.00 | 22 minutes | @cahier_de_market (4–1) |
Text overlap is the Jaccard coefficient over the set of distinct three-word phrases in the two bodies: 1.00 is identical wording, and the threshold for counting a pair at all is 0.70. Candidates are generated by simhash LSH (4 x 16-bit bands, exact Hamming <= 3) verified against the bodies with Jaccard over the SET of distinct 3-word shingles. Published first counts which side of each matching pair carries the earlier timestamp — in this corpus, which is the limitation directly below.
What this cannot establish
MEASURED, DOMINANT ERROR SOURCE: a post ingested before 2026-08-06 may have carried a forward header that was not recorded. A 45-pair hand-check against live t.me pages found 14 (31%) where the live page shows a forward header naming the other channel and the database has none, plus 4 more (9%) naming a third party. The text match itself was wrong 0 times out of 45. Read attribution_capture.items_in_trusted_window before treating the unattributed count as a claim.
Telegram lets a channel forward a post with a header naming the source, and we only began reliably recording that header on 2026-08-06. None of the 0 matches recorded here fall after that date, so for this entry we cannot say whether any of them carried a credit. The duplication is measured; the absence of attribution is not.
“Published first” means first in this corpus. We hold 19 comparable posts for this entry, running 4 August 2026 to 7 August 2026. A channel we have read one page deep will look younger than a neighbour we have read in full, and the order would flip with no change in the underlying facts.
The detector’s own notes on this observation, as it recorded them. Names in this_style are fields of the underlying evidence record, which the plain-English paragraphs above read out for this entry.
Across the whole group of 2, the earliest publisher we hold is @triple_stock — which is this entry. That is a statement about our reading window, not a claim of authorship.
Recorded under the key clone_mutual, last confirmed 8 August 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.
This channel’s posts match, word for word or near enough, posts on 1 other registered channel, found by comparing text fingerprints across every channel on the register. That matching has been checked by hand against the live Telegram pages and found reliable — 0 wrong of 45 pairs re-read.
Which channel, if either, published first is deliberately not shown. The same hand-check found that reading wrong 18 of 45 times — 60%, no better than a coin flip — because it depends on how deep our own crawl happened to reach into each channel’s history, not on when the content was actually first posted. This list is ordered by subscriber count, the same as every other listing on this site, never by which channel we think came first. Word-for-word matching has several ordinary explanations besides copying — a channel mirroring itself, an unattributed repost, or two channels independently repeating the same wire story — and this measurement cannot tell those apart. How this is measured.
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 17 Sept 2026, 18:18 | 12,879 | +6 |
| 15 Sept 2026, 15:18 | 12,873 | -1 |
| 14 Sept 2026, 00:17 | 12,874 | +3 |
| 10 Sept 2026, 04:36 | 12,871 | +20 |
| 6 Sept 2026, 20:40 | 12,851 | +132 |
| 3 Sept 2026, 00:26 | 12,719 | +4 |
| 1 Sept 2026, 18:55 | 12,715 | -3 |
| 31 Aug 2026, 19:57 | 12,718 | +3 |
| 30 Aug 2026, 17:05 | 12,715 | -2 |
| 29 Aug 2026, 18:08 | 12,717 | -6 |
| 28 Aug 2026, 15:41 | 12,723 | -6 |
| 27 Aug 2026, 16:57 | 12,729 | -5 |
| 26 Aug 2026, 19:33 | 12,734 | -6 |
| 25 Aug 2026, 18:02 | 12,740 | +2 |
| 24 Aug 2026, 19:19 | 12,738 | +3 |
| 23 Aug 2026, 06:25 | 12,735 | +29 |
| 21 Aug 2026, 15:47 | 12,706 | +32 |
| 20 Aug 2026, 14:42 | 12,674 | +5 |
| 19 Aug 2026, 12:25 | 12,669 | -1 |
| 18 Aug 2026, 13:22 | 12,670 | first reading |
185 posts held, back to 4 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 47 pages of 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. It is computed over the 65 of 72 measured posts that carry a reaction reading, and over those same posts' views.
| Window | Rolling 30 days · latest post in window 2 September 2026 |
|---|---|
| Posts held | 185 (4 August 2026 – 2 September 2026) |
| Views total | 112,114 |
| Reactions total | 494 |
| Forwards / comments | not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated |
| Readings taken | 2 Sept 2026, 21:14 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.
1,332 reactions across 162 posts, in 27 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 41.1% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| ❤ | 548 | 41.1% | |
| 👍 | 303 | 22.7% | |
| 🔥 | 160 | 12.0% | |
| 🙏 | 77 | 5.78% | |
| 👏 | 53 | 3.98% | |
| 🤣 | 33 | 2.48% | |
| 👎 | 21 | 1.58% | |
| 😭 | 19 | 1.43% | |
| 🤔 | 19 | 1.43% | |
| 🤮 | 17 | 1.28% | |
| 😱 | 16 | 1.20% | |
| 🖕 | 11 | 0.826% | |
| 😁 | 9 | 0.676% | |
| ⚡ | 6 | 0.45% | |
| 😐 | 6 | 0.45% | |
| ✍ | 5 | 0.375% | |
| 🐳 | 5 | 0.375% | |
| 💩 | 4 | 0.3% | |
| 🤯 | 4 | 0.3% | |
| 😨 | 3 | 0.225% | |
| 7 further kinds | 13 | 0.976% |
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 165 of the 185 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 1,332 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 185 most recent posts we hold, published 4 August 2026 to 2 September 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.
●현재 미장 시총 상위 200위 중 • 3% 이상 상승 종목 - 엔비디아, 델테크놀로지 • 3% 이상 하락 종목 - 팔란티어, 팔로 알토, 크라우드 스트라이크, 서비스나우, 포티넷, 스노우플레이크, 클라우드플레어 => 그동안의 시장 흐름과 확연하게 달라진 모습
🤔4🤡2❤1
* 내일 아침 브로드컴의 실적발표는 75% 확률로 중립 이상 긍정적으로 전망하는데, 시장 반응을 모르겠음. 단, 긍정적인 부분은 3개월 전은 반도체 고점이었고 지금은 반도체 저점. 브로드컴의 컨센서스와 스트릿 컨센서스의 차이가 거의 없다는 점에 주목 -> 시장의 기대치가 거의 없다는 점이 긍정적
🔥9👍2❤1🙏1
최근 엔비디아와 DELL의 실적발표는 하나의 흐름으로 읽을 필요가 있습니다. 제가 최근 계속 말씀드리고 있는 AI 인프라의 Q 사이클이 생각보다 훨씬 강하게 진행되고 있다는 점입니다. 그리고 그 과정에서 저희는 DELL을 단순한 AI 서버 업체가 아니라, AI 인프라가 ‘칩의 시대’에서 ‘AI Factory의 시대’로 넘어갈 때 가장 중요한 위치에 있는 기업 가운데 하나로 보고 있습니다.
🔥9❤2👍1😁1
* 현시점 SOX 지수에서 가장 먼저 양전을 한 종목은 엔비디아와 브로드컴 -> 의미있는 대목
👍8🔥1
* 미국 10년물 금리 4.8%는 의미있는 저항선인듯
👍3🔥1😁1🙏1
델 컨콜: “부족한 것은 D램, D램, D램!”, AI 누적 주문 1000억달러 육박. 연간 가이던스 대폭 상향 • 델 2027회계연도 2분기 실적은 예상 크게 상회. 막대한 수요에 직면한 델 고위 관계자는 공급망이 '화력 풀가동' 상태라고 언급 • 핵심 병목 현상은 'DRAM 및 NAND'와 다양한 첨단/성숙 공정 부품 • 연간 매출 가이던스를 250억달러 늘린 1920억달러로 대폭 상향 조정. “2030년 AI가 데이터센터 수요의 75% 차지할 것”이라는 거대한 전망 제시 戴尔电话会:“缺的就是DRAM、DRAM、DRAM!” ,AI积压订单逼近千亿,全年指引大幅上调 戴尔2027财年Q2业绩远超预期,面对庞大需求,戴尔高管直言供应链正“火力全开”,核心瓶颈在于“DRAM与NAND”及各类先进/成熟制程元件。公司将全年营收指引大幅上调250亿美元至1920亿美元…
❤2🤯2🔥1
Agentic AI는 GPU만 필요한 것이 아닙니다. 에이전트가 실제 기업 데이터를 읽고 추론하기 시작하면 CPU orchestration, KV Cache, Storage, Networking의 요구량도 같이 늘어납니다. DELL이 이번 콜에서 바로 그 현상을 처음으로 숫자로 보여줬다고 생각합니다. 회사도 AI 관련 전통 서버 수요와 storage 수요의 초기 신호를 명시했습니다. 그래서 이번 DELL 실적을 한 문장으로 요약한다면, “DELL의 서프라이즈는 AI 서버를 많이 판 것이 아니다. AI 투자가 처음으로 데이터센터 전체의 매출과 이익을 동시에 끌어올리기 시작했다는 것이다.”
❤2🔥1
Dell 컨콜 중 추론 수요는 이미 학습 수요를 넘어섰으며, 우리 산업 전반에 걸쳐 순수한 추가 수요를 만들어내고 있습니다. 저희는 추론이 만들어내는 토큰 수가 2030년까지 87배 증가해 3,600 quadrillion(360경) 토큰에 이를 것으로 보고 있습니다. 학습 수요 역시 2030년까지 5배 증가해 850 제타플롭스(ZFLOPS)에 이를 것으로 예상합니다. 또한 기업용 에이전틱 AI(Enterprise Agentic AI)가 2028년까지 단일 최대 워크로드가 될 것으로 전망합니다.
❤3
* 오히려 이번 실적에서 가장 강한 Bull 데이터는 $95B Backlog보다 AI Factory 고객 수입니다. DELL의 AI 고객은 이제 6,500곳 이상입니다. 그런데 첫 3,200개 고객을 얻는 데 8개 분기가 걸렸고, 최근 3개 분기에만 3,300개 고객이 추가됐습니다. 그리고 경영진은 그 가속의 중심이 Enterprise라고 명시했습니다. Enterprise 고객의 재구매, 매출, 파이프라인도 모두 QoQ·YoY 증가했다고 설명했습니다. 이게 중요합니다. 초기의 DELL AI 스토리는 사실상 CoreWeave / Neocloud → NVIDIA GPU → DELL Rack이었습니다. 이 구조라면 사이클 후반부 논리가 맞습니다. 그런데 지금은 Neocloud + Sovereign AI + Enterprise AI로 고…
❤4👍1
* “전통 서버 +122%는 Pull-forward다” 일부 맞지만, 전부 설명되지는 않습니다. 실제로 지난 Q1 컨퍼런스콜에서 DELL 경영진은 가격 상승과 공급 부족 우려 때문에 고객의 buy-ahead가 일부 존재한다고 인정했습니다. 그런데 이번 분기에는 그 이후에도 전통 서버 수요가 더 강해졌습니다. 그리고 Q2 컨콜에서 구체적인 숫자가 나왔습니다. 현재 DELL 설치 기반에 14세대(14G) 이하 서버가 약 120만 대 남아 있습니다. 17G로 교체하면 구형 서버 6~8대 → 신형 1대, 다음 달 출하하는 18G에서는 12~14대 → 1대 수준의 통합 효과가 가능하다고 회사는 설명했습니다. 더 중요한 데이터가 있습니다. DELL은 최근 두 분기 동안 전통 서버 시장점유율을 10%p 이상 높였다고 밝혔습니다. 즉 +122% …
* 이번 마진 개선을 전부 ‘메모리 마진 스태킹’으로 설명하는 것도 무리입니다. AI 서버 비중이 크게 올라가는데도 2H ISG 영업이익률을 전년 대비 1%p 이상 높게 전망하고 있습니다. 이게 중요합니다. 만약 이번 EPS 서프라이즈가 대부분 메모리 가격차에 의해 만들어진 일시적인 이익이었다면 회사가 향후 두 분기의 마진 개선까지 가이던스하기 어렵습니다. 제가 보는 마진 개선은 세 층입니다. • 일시적 요인 → 메모리·부품 가격 환경 → 유리한 가격/믹스 • 반구조적 요인 → 공급망 규모 효과 → 가격 결정력 → Dell-IP Storage 믹스 상승 • 구조적 요인 → 매출 $190B 규모에서 OpEx 레버리지 → 자동화·AI를 통한 비용구조 개선 → 매출 대비 OpEx 8%, 42년 역사상 최저 따라서 15% ISG 마진은…
JP모건) 크레도(CRDO)와 델(DELL) 컨콜후 첫 느낌 1. CRDO (-9.8%)… 피드백은 (Joe의 의견을 포함해) 상당히 미지근했습니다. 전반적으로 이번 실적 발표가 실망스러웠다는 반응입니다 — 분기 실적, 가이던스, 그리고 연간 가이던스 모두요. 그리고 컨퍼런스 콜은 해야 했던 역할의 상당 부분을 해내지 못했다는 평가입니다. 특히 6억 달러 광학(optical) 가이던스를 상향하지 않은 점(바이사이드는 10억 달러를 보고 있었고, 최소 1억 달러 상향으로 그 눈높이를 따라가 줄 것으로 기대했습니다)과 AEC 전망 및 성장 둔화("돌파구가 아니다", "큰 수의 법칙")가 지적됐습니다. 고객 집중도와 광학 부문 램프업은 여전히 사람들이 소화하기 어려워하는 리스크로 남아 있습니다. 다만 공정하게 말하자면, PIC 수주 두 건은 반가…
❤2🔥1
Showing the 12 most recent of 185 posts we hold for @triple_stock. 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.
Republished by
Channels on the register that have forwarded this channel's posts into their own feed.
Republishes
Channels on the register whose posts this channel has forwarded.
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.
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.
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.
@triple_stock 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.
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.
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.
This channel appears in 36 seed channels' Telegram-generated recommendation lists in total, of which the 24 where it ranks highest are shown above. Each is Telegram’s list for THAT channel, not this one — 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 17 September 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“트리플 아이 - Insight Information Indepth” (@triple_stock), 12,879 subscribers as measured 17 September 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/triple_stock.
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.