Amazon status: access issues and outage reports

Problems in the last 24 hours

The graph below depicts the number of Amazon reports received over the last 24 hours by time of day. When the number of reports exceeds the baseline, represented by the red line, an outage is determined.

Most Reported Problems

The following are the most recent problems reported by Amazon users through our website.

• Website Down (44%)
• Errors (33%)
• Sign in (23%)

Live Outage Map

The most recent Amazon outage reports came from the following cities:

City	Problem Type	Report Time
Frankfurt am Main	Website Down	3 hours ago
Canton	Website Down	17 hours ago
Mesquita	Sign in	1 day ago
Moorpark	Sign in	1 day ago
Chicago	Website Down	1 day ago
Edinburgh	Website Down	1 day ago

Full Outage Map

Community Discussion

Tips? Frustrations? Share them here. Useful comments include a description of the problem, city and postal code.

Beware of "support numbers" or "recovery" accounts that might be posted below. Make sure to report and downvote those comments. Avoid posting your personal information.

Amazon Issues Reports

Latest outage, problems and issue reports in social media:

• 
  Dawso (@jensuedaw) reported 42 seconds ago

  @SuisKirk33160 @omgsidewalks Guess you need to have a shared sense of humanity, a sense of common decency to think people matter. As a self-funded retiree, l ask nothing from 'working class folks' but when Amazon workers need food stamps, the US has a problem.

• 
  Janiac the Hedgehog 🏳️‍🌈 (@janiac_the) reported 2 minutes ago

  Someone gotta shut down Amazon MGM Studios, because that's two game related shows under them that have had a star suffer a major injury-

• 
  Jake Martin | Amazon Advertising 🛠 (@jake_rm_) reported 3 minutes ago

  Staying well-stocked is vital because delivery time is a huge driver of conversion rate and organic rank. If your inventory drops below what's needed to meet demand for a keyword in a specific location, Amazon will often lower your rank there and surface a competitor with a faster delivery time. Ads take the same hit, and it starts before you're actually out of stock. Let's say you have a popular variation item getting low in stock. The delivery date pushes out while the low stock ASIN is still live in your campaigns, getting impressions. The shopper sees a delivery date weeks away and scrolls. They would have no idea there's a variation on that page arriving next day. So you end up suppressing the ASIN by hand to stop it serving a bad delivery promise, then going back through the campaigns to switch it all on again weeks later. Low inventory lowers CTR, CVR, organic rank, AND bogs down your PPC operations. Do what you can to keep stock levels healthy!

• 
  Jason Swaney (@jason_swan84298) reported 4 minutes ago

  @QQQ275Soon Gotta buy the Iran oil dips over the last 3 months. Amazon was 200 micron up and down 100 ect. especially in your Roth extra play cash portion.

• 
  AI News (@ainewsusa) reported 10 minutes ago

  This is smart, but it’s a band-aid. 🤔 Amazon created the phishing problem by training us to trust its emails; now it’s selling an AI guardrail instead of fixing delivery verification itself. Still, if it stops one grandma from losing her savings, it’s worth the rollout. 💸

• 
  Steve Wise (@SteveWise_OT169) reported 14 minutes ago

  @Lord_Sugar Amazon is effective because it exists within a competitive environment. That is the real problem with the NHS. It needs to be broken up and made competitive.

• 
  Captiin (@CaptnUson) reported 19 minutes ago

  @KennyEmm8101 There is also no record that Preston was offered Amazon and refused it. Bezos stepped down as CEO in 2021 and handed the job to Andy Jassy,

• 
  javadoodles ✍️ (@javadoodlestv) reported 19 minutes ago

  @amazon the amazon locker in my apartment is causing so many issues, is there a way to opt out of this

• 
  Sunak's *****-up. (@sunakball) reported 19 minutes ago

  @RhodesFi32898 @Lord_Sugar Amazon is not a supplier but a market. So QoS remains a problem for this fantasy model.

• 
  Lupen (@0xLupenn) reported 21 minutes ago

  In 1956, a secretary invented something in her kitchen. She brought it to work in a small bottle. In 1975, she sold it to Gillette for $47,500,000. It was white paint. This is Jeff Bezos's lecture on innovation at Stanford. Her name was Betty Nesmith Graham. She was an executive assistant and a terrible typist. The new typewriters used film ribbons. You couldn't erase mistakes. So she went home, mixed white paint to match the paper, and started painting over her errors with a tiny brush at her desk. She called it Liquid Paper. Then the WD-40 story. Three people. Government contract to coat Atlas missiles in storage silos so they wouldn't rust. They failed 39 times. The name WD-40 stands for Water Displacement, 40th Attempt. They named it straight out of the lab notebook. The Atlas missile market turned out to be small. So they sold it in hardware stores instead. Then Bezos talks about Amazon. Barnes & Noble launches online. They have 30,000 employees and $3,000,000,000 in revenue. Amazon has 125 people and $60,000,000. Forrester Research publishes a headline: "Amazon.toast." Bezos calls an all-hands meeting. Tells his 125 employees to be terrified every morning. Not of Barnes & Noble. Of customers. Watch the moment he explains the question nobody ever asks him. Everyone asks what will change in 10 years. Nobody asks what will NOT change. Customers will always want low prices, fast delivery, and wide selection. So you build everything around that. It compounds for decades. One week before this lecture, Amazon launched Amazon Prime. $79 a year. Unlimited two-day shipping. Nobody thought it would work. A senior product manager who worked on Prime expansion: $210,000 base salary. 200,000,000 users. It started with a $79 idea announced to a Stanford classroom. Bookmark this and watch later - after this lecture, every "stupid idea" you have will feel like a small bottle of white paint.

• 
  Tyler (@Tylerban) reported 22 minutes ago

  @Mraza38407745 @DealsFinderIO Yeah never buy Amazon 2nd hand. Terrible experience. You will get a PS3 when you order a 4 and then you will wait ages for a refund

• 
  Guy (@thatoneguy7560) reported 30 minutes ago

  I mean I agree, but I think this is a wider streaming problem than just Marvel. Apple, Amazon, HBO etc. all seem to have moved toward this model, where writers have less creative authority and there’s no real showrunner running the whole thing

• 
  JD Fox (@JDFoxOnX) reported 31 minutes ago

  @skinroja203 American business ceases immediately and zero imports come in. Walmart, Amazon, Costco shut down. No gasoline, jet fuel or kerosene. That means no trucks to deliver goods to the Canadian stores. All food is gone from the stores within three days while everything warehoused ruins on shelves. The major concern would be how are families going to be fed. A Canadian who sees his starving children while also dealing with other Canadians looting HIS resources that he might have. It’s bad. Really bad. Again, I hope it never happens because it would be complete and total devastation. That’s the power of the US war machine and economy. Factor in we don’t have to take it to the other side of the world but is right next door makes it even easier and more terrible

• 
  Madeleine Begun Kane is also @MadKane@mas.to (@MadKane) reported 32 minutes ago

  "Amazon drone drops package into swimming pool" If you long for deliv'ry by drone, And your yard has a pool, make this known, Else your package might drown When the drone throws it down And it sinks like an overpriced stone.

• 
  Saharcia (@sofija9797) reported 35 minutes ago

  @Vengerin @mariaquevedo07 tbh I don't think Amazon would even let Alastor get cut out of S4 + maybe he has tons of lines and songs with other characters? and like someone else said, may be scheduling issues or Amir is just trolling

• 
  Max Hailperin (@MaxHailperin) reported 39 minutes ago

  @AmazonHelp Just go ahead and escalate it. Tell them to track down the agent who has that license plate and give them an appropriate message. If you care. If you want to do more than just toss your packages out into the world and hope for the best. They are your packages. Care or not.

• 
  Prinsenry Thee 1st 📚💎 (@PrinsenryThe1st) reported 40 minutes ago

  There are times while scrolling on X, I stumble upon possible untapped topic ideas for book publishing and I note them down but I tend to forget about them. I’ve checked this topic on Amazon and there are no books there but it is a major problem most WOMEN face. At least, let someone benefit from my research but DYOR first. Publish at owners risk 🥸 FOLLOW FOR MORE UPDATES ON PUBLISHING ➕

• 
  Akin Oríjà (@mapolami) reported 40 minutes ago

  Localization strategy - maybe the can learn a thing or two about Amazon in China. Tiered Services - maybe could have helped cater to different customer segments like Netflix does. As for the drivers who gamed the platform for immediate gains, this market exit has pulled down the entire house. We must always consider the big picture of our actions.

• 
  Raye (@rayemarkets) reported 41 minutes ago

  Every time Damodaran uploads a video, I always watch it because he usually takes a concept that sounds simple on the surface and then breaks down the incentives and economics underneath it, and this discussion on scaling versus profitability is a good example. The common startup narrative is that companies should grow as quickly as possible, capture market share, and worry about profits later, but Damodaran's argument is that this approach only works when the structure of the business actually supports it. A large addressable market and fast revenue growth can tell us how big a company might become, but they tell us very little about how valuable that company will eventually be unless growth can translate into better unit economics, operating leverage, pricing power, and returns on invested capital. A company can therefore become much larger without becoming economically stronger, and in some cases scaling simply multiplies the weaknesses that were already embedded in the original business model. This is why the distinction between scalability and business quality is so important. Software businesses can often add customers at very low marginal cost, meaning revenue can grow much faster than the underlying cost base, while businesses involving manufacturing, logistics, physical infrastructure, or expensive customer acquisition may require significant incremental spending for every additional dollar of revenue. Even within technology, being asset-light does not automatically solve the problem because customer acquisition costs, incentives, cloud infrastructure, research spending, and competition can effectively become variable costs that rise alongside growth. Scale only creates meaningful operating leverage when the incremental economics improve as the company gets larger, and if costs continue rising roughly in line with revenue, the company may eventually discover that what looked like a temporary profitability problem was actually structural. Amazon is therefore an important example, but also a dangerous template for other startups to copy. Amazon could tolerate years of weak accounting profitability because its scale was gradually building infrastructure, distribution density, customer relationships, marketplace liquidity, and purchasing power that improved the economics of the business over time, so the losses were connected to assets and competitive advantages that eventually supported much greater profitability. The mistake is assuming that every company reporting losses while growing quickly is following the same path, because some businesses are simply using investor capital to subsidize prices, acquire customers, or enter markets without creating corresponding economic advantages. Both companies can initially show the same headline numbers of rapid revenue growth and negative earnings, but one may be accumulating future operating leverage while the other is accumulating obligations that require continuous external capital. Damodaran's "Field of Dreams" can become a "Field of Nightmares" precisely when investors assume profitability will automatically appear once sufficient scale has been reached. The venture capital structure makes this problem more interesting because the incentives of the investor and the economics of the underlying company are not necessarily aligned. Venture portfolios depend heavily on a relatively small number of very large winners, which means a venture capitalist may rationally prefer a founder to pursue a much larger and riskier outcome rather than build a smaller company producing steady profits. A company that could become a profitable business worth a few hundred million dollars may be economically attractive to its founder, employees, and customers, but it might barely move the returns of a multibillion-dollar venture fund, while turning that same company into a speculative attempt at a ten-billion-dollar outcome provides much more upside to the fund. Scaling therefore becomes partly a consequence of portfolio mathematics rather than purely a consequence of what is optimal for the company itself, which helps explain why startups are frequently encouraged to expand geographically, add products, increase hiring, and raise increasingly large funding rounds even before the economics of the original business have been fully proven. Damodaran's point about pricing versus valuation extends this incentive further. Private markets frequently anchor financing rounds around comparable transactions, revenue multiples, user growth, subscribers, or projected future revenue rather than the present value of sustainable future cash flows, so scale itself becomes an input into the next financing round. Once that happens, raising capital can create a self-reinforcing cycle where capital funds growth, growth supports a higher private-market price, the higher price enables another larger funding round, and that new capital funds even more growth. During favorable capital-market conditions this cycle can continue for years, making it difficult to distinguish between a genuinely improving business and a company whose growth is partly being manufactured by increasingly abundant financing. The real test only arrives when the marginal investor becomes less willing to finance losses and the company has to demonstrate that customers, margins, and cash generation can support the business without constant capital injections. The expansion of private capital has allowed this process to continue much further than it could several decades ago. Companies historically reached public markets relatively early because public equity was one of the few ways to obtain the capital required for large-scale expansion, whereas mutual funds, sovereign wealth funds, private equity firms, crossover investors, and very large venture funds can now provide billions of dollars while companies remain private. Damodaran describes this as the creation of a gray market between traditional venture capital and public equity, and one consequence is that startups can reach enormous revenue bases and valuations before facing the level of disclosure, governance scrutiny, and profitability expectations traditionally associated with public companies. His data also show how much this has changed the profile of companies reaching the public market, with companies generally arriving larger in revenue terms but substantially less likely to be profitable than companies going public several decades ago. There is also a governance dimension that becomes increasingly important as companies scale privately. A founder managing a small startup and a founder controlling an organization worth tens or hundreds of billions of dollars are effectively running very different institutions, yet rapid private-market scaling can allow the governance structure of the first company to survive into the second. Founder control, dual-class shares, fragmented investor bases, and competition among venture investors can weaken the normal mechanisms that challenge management decisions, while large valuations can reinforce the belief that the founder's strategy has already been validated. The danger is that valuation growth can substitute for operational accountability during the scaling phase, and by the time profitability, capital allocation, organizational complexity, or governance problems become visible, the company may already employ thousands of people and control significant amounts of capital. Another part of Damodaran's argument that I find important is that staying small should not automatically be interpreted as failure. Some businesses naturally have better economics when they remain concentrated around a specific customer base, product category, geography, or brand position, because expanding beyond that niche can weaken pricing power or require disproportionately higher capital and marketing spending. Ferrari is an obvious example of a company whose economics partly depend on scarcity, but the principle applies much more widely: maximizing revenue is not necessarily the same thing as maximizing enterprise value. A business generating high returns on capital within a limited market can be economically superior to a much larger competitor producing weak returns after enormous capital investment, which means the correct objective should ultimately be value creation rather than size itself. Personally, this is where I agree strongly with Damodaran, because I do not see profitability and growth as opposite objectives in the first place. A company should absolutely sacrifice near-term profits when it has opportunities to reinvest capital at attractive returns, especially when that spending strengthens distribution, technology, network effects, customer retention, infrastructure, or another durable competitive advantage, but there needs to be a credible economic mechanism connecting today's spending with tomorrow's cash generation. I care much less about whether a rapidly growing company currently reports a profit than about what happens to the economics of the next dollar of revenue, because improving contribution margins, lower acquisition costs, stronger retention, greater pricing power, and falling capital requirements provide evidence that scale is actually making the business better. This also makes the discussion extremely relevant to the current artificial intelligence cycle. Artificial intelligence companies are being pushed to scale models, computing infrastructure, data centers, users, enterprise distribution, and revenue extraordinarily quickly, while the capital required to support that expansion is also becoming enormous. Some of that spending could eventually create exceptional businesses if inference economics improve, utilization rises, customers become deeply embedded in the products, and artificial intelligence generates enough willingness to pay to produce strong margins, but scale alone cannot prove that outcome. If computing costs and capital requirements continue rising alongside usage, then very fast revenue growth could coexist with mediocre returns on capital, particularly when companies must continuously finance new generations of chips and infrastructure simply to remain technologically competitive. For me, the most important question in artificial intelligence therefore is gradually shifting from how fast these companies can grow to how much economic value remains after paying for the infrastructure required to generate that growth, because eventually the market has to separate companies that are using capital to build durable operating leverage from companies that simply need ever larger amounts of capital to keep the scaling story alive.

• 
  Jill🇬🇧🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿💂‍♀️🐶🐾❤️ (@RoyalFan5457) reported 44 minutes ago

  @janiesaysyay Exactly. I went onto Amazon, found the book, scrolled down to “report an issue”. I’ve sent messages to BP & KP calling for the book tobe banned. I’ve posted on several platforms out of sheer exasperation that people think this promotion of extremism & incitement is ok. It isn’t!

• 
  🍳 (@2kiview) reported 44 minutes ago

  @AmazonHelp I tried to change my payment method to my new debit card on amazon(.)com, but unfortunately the page keep buffering and won't take me to fill the form. Idk if it's because of my connection or the server?

• 
  Matt Pauley 🎙️ (@MattPauleyOnAir) reported 44 minutes ago

  Perhaps I’m not being fair and Amazon just picked up the Victory + deals in Dallas and Anaheim and eventually they will also start charging like the other Prime teams. But the optics are still terrible. #stlblues

• 
  Duane - 🧙‍♂️🖖 - keybase.io/dfk (@honestduane) reported 45 minutes ago

  @PlumbNick I also get these kind of harassing phone calls from recruiters claiming to work with Amazon who don't seem to understand that as a prior L7 that asking me to boomerang comes with terms and conditions that require they fix the **** that let made me want to leave and not accept L8.

• 
  BG Burton (@CuriousInkCo) reported 50 minutes ago

  @MiddleAgedBaby2 @amazon 1st world problems are still real problems because we live in the 1st world! Not getting the stuff you ordered to save time in a timely fashion is annoying AF. Your Amazon experience is very different from mine, & I can’t figure out why. I get offered discounts (usually digital credits) for delivery on my weekly Amazon Day, by shipping in manufactured container, & choosing a no-rush option. They did lose one bag of my grocery order this week, but they credited my account in 6 hours. Wish I knew how to fix it for you. I rely so heavily on Amazon I’d be totally flipping over your experience. 😢

• 
  Rochelle (@itsrochellaa) reported 52 minutes ago

  @AmazonHelp But the problem is I also got a new mobile phone during my upgrade. So I don’t have a trusted device because of the new phone and new phone number now. How can I recover my account ? My email and postal address remain the same. And I have my ID. Please can you help

• 
  Anibal Gutierrez (@AnibalGuti15760) reported 54 minutes ago

  @AmazonHelp Just to give you an idea how much the unwillingness of your tech support to help.I have t send a routers to be fix,the manufacturer required a copy of the invoice which we can’t access to the account any more,the hacker is controlling that account. How do I get that info ?

• 
  Cker (@DesigningMind) reported 54 minutes ago

  @akafaceUS Here was the problem with mall design. They are massive. You park on one side at an anchor store for instance. It’s January so you and your kids all have coats on. You walk into the mall and there are no buggies/carts. You walk throughout that mall supposedly buying at many stores with only two hands that are already taken up with coats kids snacks drinks… are you gonna walk back to your car to drop off your packages midway through and then go back into the mall and walk another mile to get to another store to carry bags back? That was the reality of malls. And we did it because there were no other options, they were beautiful, and felt vibrant … so we put up with the . drawbacks. However, many got old, became a place that needed more and more security, and the downside design issues are fixed with online shopping . Amazon: you’re exhausted from a busy day you put the kids to bed. You relax on the couch buy everything you need and it’s at your door when you get home from work the next day. No-brainer. My vote would have been to fix malls. Online shopping should’ve been taxed and physical stores should have been tax free to encourage people to get off the couch, walk! and actually see the products that they are buying, and have a social day shopping with their family.

• 
  Conor (@leprechaunsrfun) reported 55 minutes ago

  @AmazonHelp No you're good this is a staff issue with the delivery hand off

• 
  Paul Roundy (@PaulRoundy1) reported 55 minutes ago

  @JeffersonianAll @ChrisGloninger I was among the first scientists to highlight in the media the risk this El Niño event becomes the worst in centuries. But the resulting Amazon & Indonesian fires are natural in those regions. These ecosystems need occasional fire. The human communities will indeed have problems & should be preparing now (or last year). The Indian monsoon has been in drought, but nothing like 1877, & they're much better prepared today. But in terms of climate change, very few organisms are dying out because of temperature. It's about the smallest aspect of modern extinction. What actually matters? Over hunting, overfishing, & direct mechanical habitat destruction. The climate bodies are wrong. IPCC has it roughly right, but a little hyperbolic because of reliance of so many papers on RCP 8.5. I've even published studies using it.

• 
  Dinesh Rawat (@Drawat0027) reported 59 minutes ago

  @AmazonHelp Again you have shared the link. How many time I need to chat for same issue and same conversation and reply by the representative