Binance 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.

Binance Issues Reports

Latest outage, problems and issue reports in social media:

• 
  babayaaga (@BabaYaaga25) reported 4 minutes ago

  @_RichardTeng @binance Go **** yourselves, Binance scammers. Criminals, you sons of *******...

• 
  TNT (@TNTCapitalC) reported 5 minutes ago

  Emotions. The current market structure and risk/reward profile don't support BTC trading at $160K–$180K. A 2–3x move from here would already be an extraordinary outcome given today's market depth and positioning. Why? Because last 10 years. The edge was never certainty. it was uncertainty. For the last decade, nobody knew where Bitcoin's terminal price could be. There was no proof, only probability. A lot of dreams and beliefs in Saylor also. Institutions bought big, they made a mistake, now they are paying the price of their greed. And they bought retail's bags also in the process. Even you, you said you have 6 figures ready to deploy, you feel you can do easy 2-3x. Safe, nice and easy. To help you and your retirement. But back in the days, 10 years ago, or even 5 years ago. Never heard anyone saying investing in BTC for retirement was easy money. In fact, investing in BTC in 2020 during Covid (6 years ago only), was risky as ****. That information asymmetry created outsized returns because the market consistently underestimated the upside. And fomo later was real when governments started accumulating very high. Today, the investment case is largely validated. Institutions, sovereigns, and corporates recognize Bitcoin as a legitimate asset. The uncertainty that once created the opportunity has been significantly reduced. And it's actually a really big thing. Same reasons why SPCX could never have been alpha. Because not enough uncertainty. It was a crowded trade. Even heard Uber driver mentioning SPCX. If 50% win and 50% lose. Who pays for it then? Where is the money coming from? Uncertainty is what gives the 100x. Certainty kills the ROI, it kills markets. Always. Don't forget. When you materialize a 100x profitable trade, it means 100 people are paying for it. (technically) It's less obvious on CEX like Binance, because you have Market Makers. But think about the exit liquidity dynamic. If you buy an altcoin on Uniswap at $1 and eventually sell it at $100, all else being equal, someone is willingly paying $100 for an asset they had no interest in buying at $1. That's the trade. You de-risk and realize gains by distributing your position into their demand. You're happy because you've crystallized a 100x return. They're happy because they believe there's still meaningful upside from $100. Markets clear because every trade has two participants with different expectations. The problem is that every additional leg higher requires increasingly larger capital inflows. As the valuation expands, the marginal buyer has to absorb supply from earlier investors who are taking profits. The higher the price, the more exit liquidity is needed to sustain the move. Going from $1 to $100 is one thing. Going from $100 to another 100x is a completely different proposition. It requires a much larger pool of incremental capital and a new wave of buyers willing to pay substantially higher prices. Alpha is made by buying before consensus. Exit liquidity arrives after consensus. Now obviously: It's not that a 100x higher price literally requires 100 times as many buyers. A small number of aggressive buyers can move price significantly if available liquidity is thin. What is generally true is that as an asset's market capitalization grows, sustaining the same percentage returns usually requires much larger dollar inflows. Going from a $10 million valuation to $1 billion is often easier than going from $100 billion to $10 trillion. This is why many hedge funds talk about "law of large numbers," "reflexivity," "marginal buyer," "liquidity," and "exit liquidity." Early investors profit because later investors are willing to pay higher prices, but each successive multiple typically requires a larger base of capital and stronger conviction. Same reason why Gold going down like a shitcoin. Most people don't understand why Gold will continue to go down. Everyone currently saying Gold is safe, Gold is the hedge. Who do you think is selling then during such certainty? That's the paradox: it's often easier to make money speculating before something is proven than after it becomes consensus. That's why we are contrarian. Because being non-contrarian doesn't work. (it didn't for us) Bitcoin could one day still reach $125K? Through continued adoption, liquidity expansion, and capital inflows? Maybe, but not now. The BM literally just started. (if you zoom out) Expecting another exponential repricing right now becomes more difficult once the market broadly agrees on the thesis. Everyone waiting and buying the dips. Even people with zero economics or finance background, and 0 investment experience, think they’re going to make easy money with one unique investment strategy. Why? On the sole basis, that apparently it worked for others in the past. We need some mad capitulation before that. Some **** hitting the fan. And it's not Saylor selling 32 btc, and it's not MSTR. SP500 dropped 80% after Dot com bubble. No one cares now. People will always say this time is different. But if SP500 dropped 80% 20 years ago, it's gonna drop 80% now. Nothing has changed. And don't think Internet bubble was larger than this current bubble. That's why we heavily positioned short on SP500 at 7,615. We are barely are break even. But let's see who is laughing in 12 months from now. Fundamentally, and will probably stop with this essay, when everyone has the same information and similar expectations, alpha compresses, and future returns tend to moderate. You won't make money with certainty. Right now, too much certainty on BTC, on GOLD, on SPX. And it's very much a remake of history. Same market, new players. Most weren't even born, or weren't old enough to invest, 20 years ago, and many are too lazy to open TradingView. Earlier today, SOL had put in a top. Every signal was flashing exhaustion, yet the market squeezed another 3% higher. That final pump only happened because of information asymmetry and surprise, the move caught participants offside. Now that the move has played out and expectations have adjusted, the asymmetry is gone. From here, the path of least resistance for SOL is lower. But a few hours ago, this was already the same path anyway. A pump doesn't change the structure. Same with BTC, same with SPX. Again, Information asymmetry created the opportunity. Consensus compresses it. The market will recover one day, BTC, SPX, Gold but not from the price levels everyone expects. In the meantime, be very careful not to burn your USDT. We are not in a bull run anymore. 🟥 US Average Hourly Earnings in 20 mins Expect volatility (though that’s just short-term noise). There’s nothing here that can sustainably push BTC higher from this point. Appreciate all your messages today. Going to archive this in case some people are interested in reading about the certainty and asymmetry discussion. Big dump coming. Gonna be another Black Thursday by the look of it. Chat soon.

• 
  Arupam (@AnandArupam) reported 7 minutes ago

  @MastrXYZ @binance @cz_binance Working hard behind the scenes.....must have started way too late!

• 
  CrypNews TV (@cryp_news) reported 12 minutes ago

  🔴 Meanwhile, these platforms are heading for the exit — no MiCA license, no more EU access after July 1.Binance withdrew its Greek application and is still unlicensed. KuCoin was banned by Austria's FMA back in February. MEXC and Bitget remain unauthorized.Even Gemini, despite holding a license, wound down its EU retail operations.OKX Europe's CEO estimates ~80% of pre-MiCA platforms won't survive the cutoff. #MiCA #Crypto #Binance

• 
  DaddyRist_WSB (@DaddyRist) reported 15 minutes ago

  @BSCNews a billion in aum in 30 days isnt a product win its a distribution win binance already owns the audience, bolting stocks on top just proves the brokerage was never the moat legacy brokers cant out distribute an app already on everyones phone, getting slow gommaged by convenience

• 
  HolochainExpose (@HolochainExpose) reported 20 minutes ago

  Top 30 → 420+. $0.031 → $0.00028. HOT/BTC HOT/ETH pairs are gone. Now Binance margin support is gone too. History shows the path often starts with reduced support, then monitoring, and for some assets eventually delisting. Investors shouldn't ignore the warning signs #Holochain

• 
  Nyx (@Nyx1139184) reported 20 minutes ago

  The perp is green and the month is red. If you've run a leveraged book, you've had this argument with your own spreadsheet. Standard unrealized P&L on a perp is (mark - entry) x size. By convention it doesn't include funding, and funding is a separate cashflow that never touches the mark. On Binance, OKX and Bybit it's a snapshot: you pay or receive only if you're holding at the funding stamp. On Hyperliquid and dYdX it accrues continuously. Short the perp against spot and you're collecting it; sit long into positive funding and you're paying it. Funding around 10% annualized is roughly 20bp a week hitting your cash that the position line never books. Book the position at the mark and let funding fall into cash, and the per-strategy P&L an LP reads is off on any perp held across a settlement, whichever way funding ran. The errors net into the cash line, so top-line NAV still foots. What it's built from doesn't. So I built Nyx to value each position off the reconciled venue balance, the number after settled funding has landed. That caps the miss at one funding interval, not a month. Funding your book missed shows up as the venue balance drifting from your ledger, a reconciliation break flagged the same week, not found at audit. Read-only keys, no withdrawal. Perp desks: does your per-strategy P&L tie to venue balances after each funding settlement, or do you find the drift in the cash line at month-end?

• 
  TNT (@TNTCapitalC) reported 23 minutes ago

  Reposting message sent to Mark with minors edits: A lot of emotion is attached to BTC reaching $200K or even $1,000,000 per coin. Perfectly justified. We all want to buy and hold and get rich? Who will pay for it? Don't care How long need to hold? Don't care Is quantum computing potentially a threat to Bitcoin current PA? Don't care Does Saylor selling affect institutional allocation? I don’t care Moon only, moon soon A lot of regrets from most people not selling BTC at 100k also. Many institutions also have regrets. Which make the whole thing even more emotionally charged. But the current market structure and risk/reward profile don’t support BTC trading at $160K–$180K this year. We’ve seen rejections after rejections after rejections as of late. Yet, some people wake up the next morning and say: they don't care. BTC still going to 200k. Even when Saylor starts selling Bitcoin, they say, it's ok, BTC still going to $200k this year. Even when BTC drops 20% in a week, people continue to say, it's ok, BTC still going to 200k this year. At some point, you need to ask why the market is rejecting those levels. Start studying instead of ignoring every rejection and repeating what you see on TV. We all want to make 2-3x profit on big size. We all miss the good old days, 100x from alts of last cycle. A 2–3x move from lower on BTC, with size (say from 30k) would already be an extraordinary outcome given today's market depth and positioning. If this happens, you need to start showing respect to the market, be grateful for the gains. Winning is not easy, it shouldn't be taken for granted. If you win, it means other people lose. Why was BTC the trade of the decade? Because last 10 years. The edge was never certainty. it was uncertainty. For the last decade, nobody knew where Bitcoin's terminal price could be. There was no proof, only probability. A lot of dreams and beliefs in Saylor also. Institutions bought big, they made a mistake, now they are paying the price of their greed. And they bought retail's bags also in the process. Someone said he has 6 figures ready to deploy, feels can do easy 2-3x by buying the dips. Safe, nice and easy. To help with retirement. But back in the days, 10 years ago, or even 5 years ago. Never heard anyone saying investing in BTC for retirement was easy money. If you are not scared when you make a big investment, something is wrong. In fact, investing in BTC in 2020 during Covid (6 years ago only), was risky as ****. That information asymmetry created outsized returns because the market consistently underestimated the upside. And fomo later was real when governments started accumulating very high. Today, the investment case is largely validated. Institutions, sovereigns, and corporates recognize Bitcoin as a legitimate asset. The uncertainty that once created the opportunity has been significantly reduced. And it's actually a really big thing. Same reasons why SPCX could never have been alpha. Because not enough uncertainty. It was a crowded trade. Even heard Uber driver mentioning SPCX. If 50% win and 50% lose. Who pays for it then? Where is the money coming from? Uncertainty is what gives the 100x. Certainty kills the ROI, it kills markets. Always. Don't forget. When you materialize a 100x profitable trade, it means 100 people are paying for it. (technically) It's less obvious on CEX like Binance, because you have Market Makers. But think about the exit liquidity dynamic. If you buy an altcoin on Uniswap at $1 and eventually sell it at $100, all else being equal, someone is willingly paying $100 for an asset they had no interest in buying at $1. That's the trade. You de-risk and realize gains by distributing your position into their demand. You're happy because you've crystallized a 100x return. They're happy because they believe there's still meaningful upside from $100. Markets clear because every trade has two participants with different expectations. The problem is that every additional leg higher requires increasingly larger capital inflows. As the valuation expands, the marginal buyer has to absorb supply from earlier investors who are taking profits. The higher the price, the more exit liquidity is needed to sustain the move. Going from $1 to $100 is one thing. Going from $100 to another 100x is a completely different proposition. It requires a much larger pool of incremental capital and a new wave of buyers willing to pay substantially higher prices. Alpha is made by buying before consensus. Exit liquidity arrives after consensus. Now obviously: It's not that a 100x higher price literally requires 100 times as many buyers. A small number of aggressive buyers can move price significantly if available liquidity is thin. What is generally true is that as an asset's market capitalization grows, sustaining the same percentage returns usually requires much larger dollar inflows. Going from a $10 million valuation to $1 billion is often easier than going from $100 billion to $10 trillion. This is why many hedge funds talk about "law of large numbers," "reflexivity," "marginal buyer," "liquidity," and "exit liquidity." Early investors profit because later investors are willing to pay higher prices, but each successive multiple typically requires a larger base of capital and stronger conviction. Same reason why Gold going down like a shitcoin. Most people don't understand why Gold will continue to go down. Everyone currently saying Gold is safe, Gold is the hedge. Who do you think is selling then during such certainty? That's the paradox: it's often easier to make money speculating before something is proven than after it becomes consensus. That's why we are contrarian. Because being non-contrarian doesn't work. (it didn't for us) Bitcoin could one day still reach $125K? Through continued adoption, liquidity expansion, and capital inflows? Maybe, but not now. The BM literally just started. (if you zoom out) Expecting another exponential repricing right now becomes more difficult once the market broadly agrees on the thesis. Everyone waiting and buying the dips. Even people with zero economics or finance background, and 0 investment experience, think they’re going to make easy money with one unique investment strategy. Why? On the sole basis, that apparently it worked for others in the past. We need some mad capitulation before that. Some **** hitting the fan. And it's not Saylor selling 32 btc, and it's not MSTR. SP500 dropped 80% after Dot com bubble. No one cares now. People will always say this time is different. But if SP500 dropped 80% 20 years ago, it's gonna drop 80% now. Nothing has changed. And don't think Internet bubble was larger than this current AI bubble. That's why we heavily positioned short on SP500 at 7,615. We are barely at break even. Boring? Bulls laughing. Let's see who will be laughing in 12 months from now. Fundamentally, and will probably stop with this essay, when everyone has the same information and similar expectations, alpha compresses, and future returns tend to moderate. You won't make money with certainty. Right now, too much certainty on BTC, on GOLD, on SPX. And it's very much a remake of history. Same market, new players. Most weren't even born, or weren't old enough to invest, 20 years ago, and many are too lazy to open TradingView. Earlier today, SOL had put in a top. Every signal was flashing exhaustion, yet the market squeezed another 3% higher. That final pump only happened because of information asymmetry and surprise, the move caught participants offside. Now that the move has played out and expectations have adjusted, the asymmetry is gone. From here, the path of least resistance for SOL is lower. But a few hours ago, this was already the same path anyway. A pump doesn't change the structure. Same with BTC, same with SPX. Again, Information asymmetry created the opportunity. Consensus compresses it. The market will recover one day, BTC, SPX, Gold but not from the price levels everyone expects. In the meantime, be very careful not to burn your USDT. We are not in a bull run anymore. Some people will read this and will still conclude: "Don't care, when 200k?" 🟥 US Average Hourly Earnings in 20 mins Expect volatility (though that’s just short-term noise). There’s nothing here that can sustainably push BTC higher from this point. Appreciate all your messages today. Going to archive this in case some people are interested in reading about the certainty and asymmetry discussion. Big dump coming. Correction is not over. As far as today is concerned, gonna be another Black Thursday by the look of it. Chat soon.

• 
  Whale Alerts (@WhaleAlerts_08) reported 23 minutes ago

  Binance Will Support the Injective (INJ) Network Upgrade & Hard Fork - 2026-07-02 Starting at approximately 2026-07-02 13:00 (UTC), Binance will suspend the deposits and withdrawals of token(s) on the Injective (INJ)

• 
  themutharuffler (@themutharuffler) reported 24 minutes ago

  @MastrXYZ @binance @cz_binance AML rules coming in globally are terrible for all of us. The surveillance, the limitations on how, when and how much of our own money we can move is bad. Really bad. But Binance isn't working for the little guy, they need to keep those scammers with off ramps.

• 
  Nft Trader (@DmForNftTrade) reported 25 minutes ago

  BINANCE#Binance EN: Binance Will Support the Toncoin (UMA) Rebranding to Gram (GRAM)

• 
  Morpheu5 Stock Watcher (@Morpheu5Watcher) reported 26 minutes ago

  BITCOIN BOUNCES OFF A 21-MONTH LOW: Bitcoin $BTC at $60,223, up 2.9% over the past 24 hours, is back above $60,000 only hours after touching its lowest price in 21 months - and the stocks wired to it are moving three times as hard. Ethereum, the second-largest cryptocurrency, sits at $1,615, up 3.1% over the same stretch. One green day, arriving directly after the worst month the big bitcoin funds have ever recorded, is the whole story tonight - what drove it, and what it does and does not prove. Start with how a thing with no earnings gets a price at all. A share of stock has profits and dividends to anchor a valuation; a coin has neither. Crypto trades on exactly two forces: the flow of money in and out of it, and the price of money itself - interest rates. When rates look set to stay high, assets that pay nothing get sold first; when rate fear eases even slightly, they bounce first. Both forces showed up on schedule this week, one on each side. The outflow side is June, and it was historic. Bitcoin fell 20.5% last month, its steepest monthly drop since June 2022, and the U.S. spot bitcoin ETFs - funds that hold actual bitcoin and trade like a stock, so anyone with a brokerage account can own the coin's move - bled a record $4.5 billion of net withdrawals, their worst month since they launched in January 2024. BlackRock's iShares Bitcoin Trust, ticker IBIT, at $34.12 (after hours), +$0.83 / +2.5% today, absorbed roughly $3.55 billion of that on its own, including nine straight days of net selling. Citigroup responded by cutting its one-year bitcoin target from $112,000 to $82,000. That is the hole this bounce is climbing out of - overnight the coin broke below $59,000 before turning. The rate side is today, and it has a name and a place. Kevin Warsh, chair of the Federal Reserve, told the European Central Bank's annual forum in Sintra, Portugal that inflation risks have come down. He promised nothing about policy - he has spent the week insisting prices are still too high - but for an asset that trades on the price of money, one softer sentence from the rate-setter was enough: bitcoin crossed back over $60,000 within hours. A dated footnote from the regulatory world landed the same day: July 1 marked the end of the transition period under MiCA, the European Union's licensing law for crypto firms, and only 244 of the 3,389 companies operating under old national rules won full licenses - Binance, which did not, restricted service in France, Italy, Spain and Poland today. Now the part for a stock investor, because the brokerage-account doors into this market moved very differently from each other today - and that spread is the lesson. The iShares Bitcoin Trust rose about 2.5%, close to the coin itself, because tracking the coin is all it does. Coinbase, ticker COIN, at $160.41 (after hours), +$14.22 / +9.7% today - the largest U.S. crypto exchange, which earns fees when people trade - rose three times the coin's move, helped by its own push beyond crypto into tokenized stocks, options and an in-app advisor, which drew a string of bullish analyst notes this week. Strategy, ticker MSTR, at $95.33 (after hours), +$8.40 / +9.7% today - formerly MicroStrategy, a company that borrowed billions to pile up a bitcoin treasury - matched that for the opposite reason: leverage. The tracker gives you the coin; the businesses give you the coin magnified, up and down alike. Anyone who held Strategy through June felt that magnification pointing the other way. What settles whether tonight was a turn or a twitch is checkable and mostly daily: the ETF flow tallies (do the withdrawals actually stop, or just pause?), whether $60,000 holds longer than a news cycle, and Thursday's 8:30am ET June jobs report from the Bureau of Labor Statistics - the government's count of how many workers employers added to payrolls last month, expected near 114,000 with unemployment around 4.3% - because rates remain the lever this entire asset class hangs from. Crypto is volatile and speculative, and a 3% bounce after a 20% month is the most ordinary thing a falling market does. The bounce is real. So is the hole. Not investment advice.

• 
  bb brownie (@bbbrownie31094) reported 26 minutes ago

  @star_okx Binance are garbage criminals but so are the rest of you. All exchanges have stolen and abused users from day one. It’s time to see all of you go to prison.

• 
  Ali Köse (@AliKse997213599) reported 28 minutes ago

  @_RichardTeng @binance The issue is not ‘disruptive changes’, but the fact that you will be forced to face restrictions in the EU market because you are unable to meet the MiCA compliance criteria (AML/Internal Controls). Europe has made its decision. Now it’s the US’s turn (at the DoJ).

• 
  Zarv (@zarvxbt) reported 29 minutes ago

  i have spent the last few weeks looking into justin sun - the founder of tron not because i hate tron. i was just curious why his name keeps coming up whenever there is a big controversy in crypto so i started reading court documents, news reports, regulatory filings and old community posts. after going through all of it, one thing became clear to me it doesn't feel like a few random incidents. it feels like the same pattern happening over and over again the first thing that surprised me was trx ownership. bloomberg reported that wallets linked to justin sun control around 63-64% of the total trx supply that's more than being a big holder. it's majority control. for a network that calls itself decentralized, i think that's an important point then i looked into what happened with steem in 2020. after sun bought steemit, the community tried to reduce his influence exchanges like binance, huobi and poloniex ended up voting with customer funds. the community lost and many members left to create hive. no matter which side you support, it became one of the biggest governance disputes in crypto the sec case in 2023 raised more questions. the sec said sun was involved in wash trading, paid celebrity promotions that weren't properly disclosed and token reward programs used for marketing. the case was later settled for $10m, without him admitting any wrongdoing i also found the grenada story interesting. sun became grenada's ambassador to the wto in 2021. later, reports said the role was used to support claims of diplomatic immunity during legal proceedings in the us. that argument didn't succeed then came the h4cks. within a short period, poloniex, htx and another bridge connected to his ecosystem were all h4cked. each time, the message was similar: users were told funds were safe, the h4cker was offered a bounty and new rewards were introduced for affected users the tusd dispute is still ongoing. justin sun and first digital trust are accusing each other of serious wrongdoing, and the courts haven't reached a final decision yet more recently, sun sued world liberty financial after one of his wallets was frozen. he says the contract included a blacklist function that wasn't publicly disclosed. the project rejected those claims and filed its own lawsuit none of this means tron isn't useful. billions of dollars in usdt move through the network every day and a lot of people rely on it this thread isn't about tron, it's about the person behind it after reading everything i could find, i don't see a few unrelated controversies. i see the same themes showing up again and again don't take my word for it, read the sources yourself and decide what you think