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 (34%)
• Sign in (23%)

Live Outage Map

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

City	Problem Type	Report Time
Township of Evan	Website Down	2 hours ago
Edison	Website Down	4 hours ago
Inverurie	Errors	1 day ago
Carrollton	Errors	1 day ago
Nicolás Romero	Errors	1 day ago
Valencia	Errors	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:

• 
  𝒌𝒂𝒕𝒊𝒆ᥫ᭡ (@katiessafk) reported 2 minutes ago

  @foreurydice amazon prime would’ve held it down

• 
  JD Fox (@JDFoxOnX) reported 4 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

• 
  Duane - 🧙‍♂️🖖 - keybase.io/dfk (@honestduane) reported 5 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.

• 
  Sebastian Caniulao | Ecommerce Email & Growth (@canipack21) reported 6 minutes ago

  @eliweisss Good problem to have. The piece I would move up the list alongside the hire is pulling those Amazon buyers onto the owned list, since the channel gives you almost nothing on repeat. Insert cards plus a registration offer was the only bridge that ever worked for us.

• 
  Amazon Help (@AmazonHelp) reported 10 minutes ago

  Hey there! Thanks for reaching out to us and sharing your feedback. While Alexa for Shopping cannot be removed entirely, the chat window can be dismissed or closed. If you're on the chat window in the Amazon Shopping app, you can dismiss the Alexa for shopping screen either by swiping down the chat window, by clicking on the Alexa icon in the bottom of your app, or clicking on the cross (x) in the top of the chat window. Hope this helps. -Tasha

• 
  Cker (@DesigningMind) reported 12 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.

• 
  Tesla_Optimus (@Tesla_Optimus_K) reported 14 minutes ago

  Tiger Global didn't dump AI. It moved down the stack. The Aug. 14 13F shows Q2 cuts that look violent: Alphabet 10.63 million shares to 5.81 million, about 45%. Broadcom roughly halved. Netflix gone. Nvidia, Microsoft, Amazon, Meta all trimmed. Then two new lines appear — about 675,000 AMD shares worth ~$392 million, plus a small SpaceX stub. Alphabet is still a top holding near $2.1 billion. This is rebalance, not a white flag. Here's the thing: platforms still fund the capex, chips still bill it. Tiger kept Nvidia huge, doubled Intel, and bought the challenger GPU. Holder counts rose in both Alphabet and AMD. The next tell is cloud margins and who actually wins the rack, not one 13F headline. They sold some of the bill-payer. They bought more of the invoice. Source : Yahoo Finance #TigerGlobal #AMD #Alphabet $GOOGL $AMD

• 
  Miami Dolphins Flag Guy (@clay8269) reported 16 minutes ago

  @branderson7474 @AdamSandler I watched so many people retire from the miliary buy a brand new flag fold it place it in their shadow box. I want my flag to have a story not some brand new flag straight from Amazon. The value is my flag will have a story I can pass down.

• 
  Jonathan Smith (@DegenerateTBone) reported 16 minutes ago

  As some of you have pointed out, one option is to get the free Amazon Prime account and then pay for the Jackets subscription. Still a massive downgrade from the (terrible) FanDuel TV deal, where the same price got both the Jackets and the Cavs. Now, $19.99/ month per team.

• 
  Lupen (@0xLupenn) reported 16 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.

• 
  rai (@rai_razwan) reported 18 minutes ago

  Man Utd turned down £10m+ from Amazon last year because Amorim didn't want cameras around. Amorim's gone. Carrick's in. All or Nothing is now on for the whole of 26/27 — at a record fee for a football documentary. Bold move, filming this one. #MUFC #PremierLeague

• 
  Francisco Kemeny (@FranciscoKemeny) reported 19 minutes ago

  @petergyang @bot I tried using my passkey, that would have been nice. Didn’t work with my Amazon login.

• 
  David Murithi (@DaviMurithi) reported 19 minutes ago

  1 Customer research. Involves digging through reviews i.e. Trustpilot, Amazon to identify recurring patterns, avatars, benefits, objections and their frequencies. This is the most crucial step. You get this step wrong & you will flush all the ad budget down the ******* toilet

• 
  Matt Pauley 🎙️ (@MattPauleyOnAir) reported 22 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

• 
  🍳 (@2kiview) reported 23 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?

• 
  The Flicktator (@The_Flicktator) reported 24 minutes ago

  @Collider Amazon stop making terrible straight to Prime movies and give us back our ad free tier

• 
  mitrebox (@mitrebox) reported 28 minutes ago

  Various economic conditions, regulation, debt has broken up American companies into mostly sector bases. Amazon kind of an exception. In Asia, however there is little trust and the courts are slow. If you can't trust the system you need to grow, you become the system.

• 
  Sunak's *****-up. (@sunakball) reported 30 minutes ago

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

• 
  Good Morning Donkey Fans (@mornindonkeyfan) reported 30 minutes ago

  BRONCOS WEEK 12 - @Steelers vs. Dr. Rogers Steelers with a new coach and world renowned medical expert at qb. I don't know if they will be good or terrible. My gut says terrible given the change and age of their virologist. But if history shows you anything the steelers find a way to be good. Amazon Prime game warning....make sure you help the rents with logging on and passwords as part of turkey day.

• 
  David Bruce (@DavidBruceman) reported 34 minutes ago

  @omgsidewalks If climate change is really a concern then why is no one mentioning the destruction of the Amazon rain forest? It slows Global Warming: By locking away greenhouse gases, the Amazon helps slow down the pace of global climate change.

• 
  . (@_GiftandACurse) reported 36 minutes ago

  Switched my dermatologist prescription to the Amazon pharmacy and it cut the cost down significantly. Small wins!

• 
  Guy (@thatoneguy7560) reported 40 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

• 
  bhavesh shah (@bhaveshshah) reported 42 minutes ago

  @AmazonHelp @JeffBezos Hi it still doesnt work .. even tagging @JeffBezos doesn’t seem to work for a simple return issue

• 
  Joel (@DailyPlanetoid) reported 42 minutes ago

  @RealMassguy @2fort4 - Trace DNA handling: Microscopic touch DNA on the knife sheath could be the result of secondary transfer or scene contamination. -2 UNIDENTIFIED MALE PROFILES ON THE SHEATH -completely ignoring the ACTUAL male DNA profiles FOUND IN THE HOUSE, at the scene, -Hair found in chapinin's hand that completely excludes Kohberger as a contributor - Terrible cctv: the Vague, intentionally degraded CCTV footage of a vehicle they could never truly decide on make/model until BK's name, it was a nissan, a 2 door, a ford then a2011–2013 Hyundai Elantra, but Kohberger drove a 2015 model so they bump it up to 2016. - Inexact cell tracking: Mobile tower pings only prove he was somewhere within a wide geographical zone, not at the exact house. -No victim connection: prosectour bill thompson confirm this after plea. There is no evidence of digital stalking, social media contact, or prior real-world interaction with the victims. -LACK of any physical evidence: Despite a bloody, violent crime, investigators found zero victim DNA or blood in Kohberger's car or apartment. -inconstant eyewitness discription across all 3 of DM's interviews, while BF account was never used due to it not matching DM's -Delayed emergency call: The 8-hour gap between the estimated time of the murders and the police notification leaves an unmonitored window of time at the crime scene. -Proven fact that a clean up amongst the common areas occurred. -ILLEGAL IGG PROCESS: why did the fbi "destroy" all evidence of how they used a sequencing tool that "fills in the gaps" to build out the dna profile they had until it created enough to use for public genealogy sites.. -Every tip or lead was dropped after they recieved BK's name -early documents show a focus on frat bros and inner/wider circle surrounding drug use and persona motives -Amazon CLICKS not purchases, learn to read ******** Amazon click history document, not a receipt or POP shows On 20 Mar 2022 in PA it shows Ka-Bar knife / sheath / sharpener pages, plus cart and checkout URLs. Many similar rows over a couple days. Each page load is a new line. This file alone does not prove a purchase went through, only that those items were viewed and checkout was opened. -the non public list of 12 potential suspects/poi that never had BK's name on it, including the first original including - COLE BARANBERG: by nov 16 was being followed by LE to obtain a sample for comparison, his DNA was found "inconclusive"(can not be excluded) to the male profile found under maddie's fingernails.. why didnt fbi go use there dna ai for that male profile? hmmm a military trained culinary chef that worked at a Big 5 Sporting Goods store for 8 years, whos comes from a criminal family of ******, murderers and drug traffickers -BRENT KOPACKA! wont even bother with you -JOSE CRUZ: he was alleged only a year prior to the murders that on October 10, 2021, a masked intruder carrying a knife broke into a home shared by four female college students at 3:38 AM. Jose Cruz, the neighbour became a suspect after lying to police about his whereabouts after his albi didn't check out, his dna was found on cigarette's on the property of 1122... like come ******** on. -JACK SHOWALTER: ("Grub Truck" Guy): One of the last people seen with Madison and Kaylee on the late-night food truck livestream. -JACK DUCOEUR : hot head recent EX to Kaylee Goncalves'. had the clearest motive of anyone, lied about call of 17 mins, can be heard on 1112 balcony footage prior to 3AM was most interviewed POI -DYLAN MORTENSEN:was physically inside a mass homicide scene, is the only eye witness and her account changed so many times, but was so not credible. She was awake cant hear a double murder in the bed above her but can hear a voice well enough that she couldnt recongise in abathroom on the other side of the floor she is one, but also couldn't accurately tell the difference between xana or kaylee.. said she went to sleep until 11am phone activity prove that to be completely fale..investigators failed to exhaustively vet her timeline, alibi, and state of mind to ensure she had no involvement. -BETHANY FUNKE: As the other surviving resident inside the house during a brutal quadruple murder, she should of also been automatically an operational subject of interest. She has a conflicting account compared to dylan, slept on the bottom floor where no attacks occurred... and survived completely unharmed. why is everything regarding Bethany sealed? compared to even dylan? we know nothing, she has not spoken.. not even her phone activity.. that enough to raise any doubt for you yet? or you just gunna pretend nothing matter especially unidentified male dna even tho the button on the sheath is SUCH PROOF OF GUILT! onlt if its BK's name attached

• 
  TheAlphaLegion (@legioxxalpha) reported 48 minutes ago

  @Awennon Ah yes, with Femstudoes and other forced black rock and Amazon crap Primaris marines are TOTTALLY the problem as 40k gets' slopped and normified

• 
  shivam maurya (@shivamm57995718) reported 54 minutes ago

  @AmazonHelp Your team is saying they have investigated but there are no issue so but I have received damaged product kindly refund the money

• 
  JK47 (@Habanero_Jefe) reported 55 minutes ago

  @mookiealexander Dumb move...I like / respect DM, but blending SNL tabloid news skits into MNF was a giant F - . Then they doubled down by bringing in Tony K... then C.C... The **** list goes on... glad A.M bounced and got PAID 💰 by Daddy Amazon... he earned it

• 
  Pffft2 🇺🇸🔥 (@45wonyuge) reported 56 minutes ago

  @glennsarcastic @amazon Wow, I did not know this! I think it’s because amazon uses USPS primarily now. My back up delivery person is very good but told me that my primary delivery person sends packages back when she feels they are too heavy for her to deliver. I never had this problem when they used fed ex. If you ever attempt in the future, contact me and I’ll give you an alternate address. So sorry!

• 
  Raye (@rayemarkets) reported 60 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.

• 
  Michael Rauch (@Michael_L_Rauch) reported 60 minutes ago

  @WaterGardenApps @Tesla @Waymo Terrible business with race to bottom on margins. Neither Waymo or Zoox are going anywhere with Google & Amazon money, but too many want to believe.