Telegram Financial Report Revealed: Main Revenue Actually Comes from Selling Coins!

marsbitОпубліковано о 2026-01-07Востаннє оновлено о 2026-01-07

Анотація

Telegram's unaudited financial report for the first half of 2025 reveals a 65% year-on-year revenue increase to $870 million, up from $525 million in the same period of 2024. However, the company reported a net loss of over $220 million, compared to a net profit of $334 million a year earlier. This loss is attributed to a significant decline in the value of its Toncoin (TON) holdings, leading to asset write-downs. Despite its growth in users—now exceeding 900 million monthly active users—Telegram's financial performance is heavily tied to TON. Approximately one-third of its revenue, around $300 million, comes from TON-related exclusive agreements, including wallet integration and payment services. Moreover, Telegram has sold over $450 million worth of TON in 2025 alone, accounting for about 10% of TON's market capitalization, making cryptocurrency sales a major revenue stream. Telegram's planned IPO has been delayed due to ongoing legal investigations involving its founder, Pavel Durov, in France. The company secured $1.7 billion in convertible bonds from institutions like BlackRock and Mubadala in May 2025. Originally launched in 2017, TON faced regulatory challenges from the SEC but was revived as a community-led blockchain. Despite initial growth, TON's ecosystem has struggled recently, with many projects declining significantly in value.

Author: C Labs Crypto Watch

According to unaudited financial reports disclosed by the Financial Times, Telegram, known as the "dark version of WeChat," achieved revenue of $870 million in the first half of 2025, a 65% year-over-year increase, showing a significant leap compared to $525 million in the same period of 2024.

From a "revenue growth" perspective, this is a quite impressive growth curve.

However, the problem lies in the profit side. Telegram recorded a net loss of over $220 million in the first half of 2025, compared to a net profit of $334 million in the same period last year.

The loss did not stem from a collapse in the main business but was due to a significant decline in the value of Toncoin (TON) held by the company in 2025, leading to a write-down of related assets.

PART 01: Telegram's Development History

Telegram was founded in 2013 and is one of the world's most important instant messaging platforms.

As of 2025, Telegram's monthly active users have exceeded 900 million, covering Europe, the Middle East, South America, and emerging markets, making it one of the fastest-growing social applications globally.

For crypto users, Telegram has become the de facto "public discussion layer" of the crypto industry: a large number of exchange announcements, project governance, airdrop information, OTC trading, and on-chain communities use Telegram as their core platform.

This gives it the dual attributes of a social platform and financial information infrastructure.

PART 02: IPO Plans Shelved

Although Telegram announced preparations for an IPO, the practical obstacle is that its founder, Pavel Durov, is still under investigation in France (Breaking! TG Founder Arrested, TON Price Plummets).

Telegram has clearly stated that it will not proceed with the listing until related compliance issues are clearer.

Fortunately, Telegram is not short of capital support. In May 2025, the company completed a $1.7 billion convertible bond financing, backed by top institutions including BlackRock and Mubadala.

PART 03: Telegram's Relationship with TON

The relationship between Telegram and TON is also complex.

In 2017, Telegram launched the blockchain project TON (Telegram Open Network), aiming to embed a payment system into the messaging app, and raised approximately $1.7 billion in 2018. However, in 2019, it was forced to halt the project after the SEC deemed it an unregistered securities offering. Telegram settled with regulators and exited the project in 2020.

Subsequently, TON was reborn as a community public chain, and Telegram re-engaged with it in a "non-official but deeply integrated" manner, which saw significant growth in 2024.

Unfortunately, in 2024, after founder Durov was arrested, the rapid progress came to an abrupt halt (TON Chain Crashed? No New Blocks for a Long Time).

Most of the once-popular TON ecosystem projects have now faded, with token prices generally down over 70%:

However, according to the latest financial report, the relationship between Telegram and TON has already gone beyond "official support for a public chain."

Significant Proportion of TON-Related Revenue

The financials show that about one-third of Telegram's revenue (approximately $300 million) comes from exclusive agreements related to TON, including wallet integration, payment functions, and ecosystem collaboration.

At the same time, Telegram is also one of the most significant sources of TON circulation, having sold over $450 million worth of TON since 2025, accounting for about 10% of TON's current market value.

This means that selling coins is Telegram's main business, and simultaneously, Telegram is the biggest whale dumping TON!

Пов'язані питання

QWhat was Telegram's revenue in the first half of 2025 and what was the year-over-year growth rate?

ATelegram's revenue in the first half of 2025 was $870 million, representing a 65% year-over-year growth compared to the same period in 2024.

QWhy did Telegram report a net loss in the first half of 2025 despite significant revenue growth?

ATelegram reported a net loss of over $220 million in the first half of 2025 due to a significant decline in the value of the Toncoin (TON) it held, which led to an accounting write-down of these assets.

QWhat is the relationship between Telegram and the TON blockchain project?

ATelegram initially launched the TON blockchain project in 2017 but was forced to abandon it in 2020 after a settlement with the SEC. The project was later revived by the community, and Telegram has since re-engaged with it in a 'non-official but deeply integrated' manner, with TON-related services now contributing significantly to its revenue.

QHow much of Telegram's revenue came from TON-related exclusive agreements in the first half of 2025?

AApproximately one-third of Telegram's revenue, about $300 million, came from TON-related exclusive agreements in the first half of 2025.

QWhat major financing did Telegram secure in May 2025 and which institutions were involved?

AIn May 2025, Telegram completed a $1.7 billion convertible bond financing round with backing from top-tier institutions including BlackRock and Mubadala.

Пов'язані матеріали

Why Pricing Social Interactions is Doomed to Fail?

Titled "Why Putting a Price on Social Interaction Is Doomed to Fail," this article critiques attempts to monetize social networks directly through SocialFi models, arguing their inevitable failure stems from a fundamental misunderstanding of media dynamics. Using Marshall McLuhan's theory of "hot" and "cold" media, the author posits that social networks are inherently "cold" media. Their value isn't contained in individual posts but is co-created through user participation, interpretation, and fragmented, ongoing interaction (e.g., replies, shares). This ambiguity and need for user involvement are core to their function. The article asserts that SocialFi projects like Friend.tech failed because introducing real-time, tradable financial pricing (a definitive "hot" signal) into this "cold" environment doesn't add a layer—it replaces the medium's essence. The unambiguous price signal overshadows and nullifies the nuanced, participatory social signal. Users become traders, not participants, and when speculative profits vanish, the underlying social ecosystem—never genuinely cultivated—collapses entirely. This principle extends beyond crypto. The author argues platforms like Twitter have gradually "heated up" through metrics (likes, retweets counts, algorithmically defined value), shifting users from participants to performers and eroding organic engagement. The solution isn't to abandon capital but to manage its entry point. Successful models like Substack, Patreon, or Bandcamp allow capital to "condense" at specific, isolated nodes (e.g., subscriptions, one-time payments) without permeating and "heating" every social interaction. They preserve the core "cold," participatory medium while enabling monetization at designated boundaries. The NFT boom and bust serves as a stark parallel: the ancient "cold" medium of collecting (valued for story, community, gradual accumulation) was rapidly destroyed by platforms that introduced real-time floor prices, rarity scores, and trading dashboards, transforming collectors into speculators and vaporizing cultural value when prices fell. The core lesson: "Liquidity equals heat." Injecting high liquidity and definitive pricing into a "cold" participatory medium doesn't optimize it; it fundamentally alters and destroys its value-creating mechanism. The future lies not in pricing every social gesture but in finding precise, non-invasive points for capital to condense without overheating the entire ecosystem.

marsbit8 хв тому

Why Pricing Social Interactions is Doomed to Fail?

marsbit8 хв тому

Jensen Huang's CMU Speech: In the AI Era, Don't Just Watch, Build

Jensen Huang, CEO of NVIDIA and a first-generation immigrant, delivered the commencement address to Carnegie Mellon University's class of 2026. He shared his personal journey from a humble background to founding NVIDIA, emphasizing resilience, learning from failure, and the responsibility that comes with leadership. Huang framed the present moment as the dawn of the AI revolution, a shift he believes is more profound than previous computing waves. He described AI as fundamentally resetting computing—moving from human-written software to machines that understand, reason, and use tools. This will create a new industry for generating intelligence and transform every sector. While acknowledging AI's potential to automate tasks and displace some jobs, Huang distinguished between the *tasks* of a job and its core *purpose*. He argued AI will augment human capability, not replace humans. The real risk, he stated, is not AI itself, but people being left behind by those who effectively use AI. He presented AI as a generational opportunity for massive infrastructure investment—in chip factories, data centers, energy grids, and advanced manufacturing—that could re-industrialize nations like the U.S. and bridge the digital divide by making computing and intelligent tools accessible to all. Huang called for a balanced approach: advancing AI safely and responsibly, establishing prudent policies, ensuring broad access, and encouraging universal participation. He urged the graduates not to fear the future but to engage with optimism and ambition, reminding them of CMU's motto, "My heart is in the work." His core message was clear: this is their moment to actively build and shape the AI-powered future, not merely observe it.

marsbit1 год тому

Jensen Huang's CMU Speech: In the AI Era, Don't Just Watch, Build

marsbit1 год тому

The Era Has Arrived Where Human Writers Must Prove They Are Not Machines

The article describes an era where AI-generated content is flooding the market, forcing human authors to prove they are not machines. It begins with the example of dozens of AI-written, error-ridden biographies of Henry Kissinger appearing on Amazon within hours of his death, a pattern repeated for other deceased celebrities and even living experts who find fraudulent books under their names. This spam content has exploded, with monthly new book releases on platforms like Amazon reaching 300,000 by late 2025. The issue spans genres, from suspiciously high proportions of AI-written teen romance and self-help books to dangerous, AI-generated foraging guides containing lethal advice. The platforms' automated review systems, designed to catch plagiarism and banned words, are ill-equipped to detect AI-generated text that avoids these pitfalls while being nonsensical or fraudulent. The problem has infiltrated traditional publishing. A major publisher, Hachette, had to recall a bestselling horror novel after AI detection tools suggested 78% of its content was machine-generated. An acclaimed European philosophy book was later revealed to be entirely written by AI under a fake author persona. In response, authors are fighting back. At the 2026 London Book Fair, 10,000 writers published a blank book titled "Don't Steal This Book" containing only their signatures—using emptiness as a protest weapon in an age of AI overproduction. Initiatives like the "Human Author Certification" program have emerged, ironically placing the burden on humans to prove their work is not machine-made. The article warns of a vicious cycle: AI-generated low-quality books pollute the data used to train future AI models, leading to "model collapse" and an ever-worsening flood of digital waste, eroding trust in publishing and devaluing human creativity.

marsbit1 год тому

The Era Has Arrived Where Human Writers Must Prove They Are Not Machines

marsbit1 год тому

Торгівля

Спот
Ф'ючерси
活动图片