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 (45%)
• Errors (31%)
• Sign in (24%)

Live Outage Map

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

City	Problem Type	Report Time
Bridgwater	Sign in	17 hours ago
Hayange	Errors	2 days ago
San Nicolás de los Garza	Sign in	2 days ago
Miguel Hidalgo	Website Down	2 days ago
Paris	Website Down	4 days ago
Guadalajara	Errors	5 days 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:

• 
  Fenton Wood (@WoodFenton) reported 33 seconds ago

  I had a dream that I was hired to write a HHG2G sequel and it was terrible and it's now out of print. It was a change of pace from my usual dream, in which I look at my Amazon page and there's a terrible, hastily-written book that I don't remember writing, but apparently did.

• 
  Yishan (@yishan) reported 59 seconds ago

  I really didn't expect this to get as much circulation as it did, but then again looking back, it's always the least-legible things that people get crazy about. I'll explain in more detail, and then maybe we can have some more informed arguments. First, the quoted post is not based on observations about the US. This is based on observations of China, which I consider to be the world's most advanced economy, where "advanced" is measured by "furthest up the Kardashev scale." The US (esp tech) might think it's further along, but 1) that AI lead is very small, and 2) Kardashev is measured primarily by amount of usable energy harnessed. China is far beyond the US on that front. (If you don't agree, you can click [x] and unfollow) There are two things we often hear about China: 1) China is facing a population bomb, with plummeting fertility rates and not enough young people to support its elderly population! 2) China has too many people, its youth unemployment rate is super high (~18% in July 2026)! How can a country have too few young people and too many young people at once? The answer could be one of any number of economic theories. Here's a new one, which is what I was thinking in my original post: (This isn't a well-developed theory - the Rats call it a "butterfly idea" - so you've been warned) Once of the nuances about China's youth unemployment isn't that the jobs don't exist, it's that many unemployed youth don't want to work the jobs that do exist. One emerging scenario is this: there are many jobs available, but they either pay too little or are uninteresting, and young people prefer to just live with their parents instead of spending their time working one of those jobs. Although China does not have a big welfare system, their parents happen to own enough savings and assets that they are able to pay for their [one] child to continue living with them. Notice the interesting inversion here: the prior assumption about "one child supporting two parents and four grandparents" inverts to "two parents support just one child." (There's the "four grandparents" but there are not necessarily four living grandparents, and many old people live very cheaply) That prior assumption rested on yet another assumption, which is that, as a general rule, people would not have substantial retirement assets and so one's children were one's retirement plan: a productive child is the person supporting their elderly indigent parents. Children do still often support their parents, but another thing may also be happening: parents save enough assets to fund their retirement, and the assets grow faster than they use them, especially as they scale back the cost of their lifestyle, and - in some cases - it ends up being enough to continue supporting their child. The scenario I describe would occur more often if the cost of living stayed low or even dropped over time. Again, this is a China effect: China's industrial policy does not focus on maximizing profits (or GDP), but rather on what we might call "make more stuff and everything gets cheaper." Everyone versed in economics understands this notion; we have lots of arguments in SF about "build more housing if you want it to be cheaper, and so more people can have housing." Well, China produces more of everything, especially the things needed for regular living: consumer goods, groceries, etc. It drives prices down by encouraging producers to hyperscale production, and while this does not maximize profits, they more or less "make it up on volume." The West imagines this to be some kind of nefarious predatory strategy to destroy Western industries, but it's really just China making more because when everyone has more, the people are happy. The US company that comes closest to this philosophy is Amazon, which famously optimizes for scale and operational efficiency so as to maximize value delivered to customers, putting price pressure on its suppliers and keeping their operating margin razor-thin (excludes digital services like AWS). Amazon's competitors also think that it's a nefarious predatory strategy to destroy them, but it's just Amazon serving the most customers at the lowest possible prices! Here's a question: if post-scarcity abundance was on the way, what would be the first signs? Well, you might see a lot of overproduction (or overcapacity). And that would tend to drive prices towards zero. In the US we often focus on the jobs effect of that: your labor will be worth nothing, so you're going to lose your job. Well okay, but all the **** you need to buy also becomes free. How much do you need a job if everything you need is free? That argument obscures the weird part by pointing at the ends: the weird bit is in the transitionary middle, where you've lost your job, things are very-cheap-but-not-free, and you are able to hustle a bit of money with your part-time job. The economy is not one homogenous good, it's a heterogenous set of goods. But if the production cost of a large enough segment of material goods and daily necessities is driven down far enough, then at some point your overall cost-of-living is falling, not rising. There are Baumol goods, but they are not intractable - some are due to regulations (very different in China vs what US thinkers are familiar with here). Example: medical costs are far lower in China, with comparable or superior quality - a big portion of high US medical costs have to do with simple medical supplies in the US being overly expensive. So you have a situation where elderly parents start from a sufficiently stable financial base where they were already taking care of their grandparents and one child, and then one or more grandparents pass, and their own lifestyle starts to scale back as they age, while cost of living for basic necessities drops over time. The child is used to a certain standard of living, that standard gets cheaper to maintain, so understandably the child not going to take a job unless they are hyper-ambitious or the job is very interesting and pays super-well. In the US we are used to thinking of all Asians as hard-working and ambitious, but there are plenty of losers and middling young people in China - they are the ones who are living at home and not going to Tsinghua or Stanford. China has plenty of NEETs. I'm also not saying what I've described above is happening with all of them, but it being true for even 5-10% would yield the high youth unemployment number. One of the common answers to the declining population "problem" in China is "we'll fill the labor gap with robots." China is indeed far ahead of the US when it comes to robotics. But it hasn't yet reached the level of overhauling society yet (I feel like it could within 2 years...), and the trends I've described have been playing out for at least a decade already. So, when I say "post-scarcity abundance actually begins by manifesting first as youth unemployment," that is what I'm gesturing at. The reason it's not manifesting as "everyone unemployment" (...for now) is really just inertia: if you're an older person with a job, you tend to keep that job. It's easier to keep a job than for an entry-level young person to get a new job, especially if that young person isn't looking for any ****** job, but a job that's more interesting and pays significantly more, vs living at home and chilling out. Thus, if you have a situation where the segment of the population that finds it hardest to lands a job receives (via whatever combination of events) enough of the economic surplus (in China's case via their parents) that's being created by technologically-driven government-incentivized industrial and agricultural policy focused primarily are reducing scarcity for as many people as possible... then it might mean that the closer you get to post-scarcity abundance, the more those people aren't going to have jobs. Or more precisely, the more they are going to choose not to take any of the jobs currently available. Is any of this playing out in the US? I had lots of comments in my original post lambasting what I said (fair; it's not like I explained anything) from an assumed US standpoint. The US is a little different. It does not directly focus its economy on maximizing productive output for the broadest possible base of consumers. It tends to bring (or has historically brought) great prosperity to a great many, but mainly via the indirect effects of capitalism. However, the American system today suffers from a combination of misguided regulation, and profit-optimizing market structuring by large players. (Here, people like to quibble so here are some caveats; if you find such things tiresome, skip the next three paragraphs: No, not all regulation is misguided. Some regulation is good and promotes healthier markets and better net outcomes. But good regulation can become out of date, or regulatory capture happens, or dumb regulations get made by officials who are out of touch with technical realities - this last one does seem more and more common. Large players seek to re-structure the market in ways that are favorable to their profits, and not necessarily total value delivered to customers, e.g. hedge funds buying up all fire engine manufacturers, so that US municipalities have to pay $1-2m for a new truck, while the equivalents can be found on Alibaba for 1/10th the price. Another example of large market players influencing market structure to optimize for profits is offshoring all of their manufacturing capability!) Back to the main thread: For many complex and inter-related reasons, cost of living in the US is not falling - it's rising almost untenably for most. At the same time, it's still hard for young people to find jobs, because the "there are jobs, just not ones I want to take" effect also exists here, except that living with parents or on minimal income is far harder, so everything feels extra ******. When you don't have a job, and everything is very-cheap-but-not-free, BUT you don't have access to those very cheap foreign-made goods because importers buy low and sell high to you while you still only have minimal income, "lying flat" feels like a whole different story in the US, vs China. One area where a China-like effect does occur is in availability of consumer tech devices. Tech companies have engaged somewhat more often in the "make more and make it cheaper so more people can buy it" strategy, though this seems to be driven more by the megalomania of creating the biggest possible company than any notion of broad-based industrial economic development - but the effect is similar: almost everyone now carries around a device in their pocket 100x more powerful than the computers on the Saturn V, and has access to untold amounts of online services. America has post-scarcity abundance in a narrow slice of goods and services. America (or its population) could participate in the Chinese-driven post-scarcity trend by simply eliminating the trade barriers and allowing Chinese goods to flood the US. And unlike the cheap low-quality Chinese goods of yesteryear (i.e. most Americans' received impression), these are goods of comparable or higher quality. The problem is that not only would this potentially yield the same "lying flat" youth unemployment issue in the US, it would utterly demolish many American businesses, and thus the wealth base of most American elites. Every American car company would probably be gone in 18 months. And American youth are not going to rebuild America's manufacturing base, they're just not going to. And American robots aren't going to either, they'll be outcompeted by Chinese robots. In another post, I offhandedly mentioned that we're in the Singularity. Most people who follow me live in the tech sphere, so this was largely accepted unchallenged. But many of the "no we're not" objections basically rested on the idea that "life is still ****** and it's trending worse and the Singularity is supposed to be like Heaven, so we can't possibly be in the Singularity." Well, there is nothing that says the Singularity or even the post-scarcity abundance world is going to subjectively feel great, much less the transitionary path to it. The Singularity only says that AI will become smarter than humans, and post-scarcity abundance only says that all material goods are going to be free. Human happiness and pleasure are a function of many things, and most of them are not material. "All your stuff being free and every robot is way smarter than me" does not by itself a utopia make. The road to post-scarcity abundance is not necessarily going to be a pleasant or positive experience. We still have to choose to make it so. The rest is left as an exercise to the reader.

• 
  Jessica (@jessica_coderx) reported 4 minutes ago

  2. Take the topic to Amazon and find books already ranking well. This tells you people aren't just interested in the problem. They're actively spending money to solve it. Demand exists. You're simply entering an existing market.

• 
  Amazon Help (@AmazonHelp) reported 14 minutes ago

  @PK55629325 @PK55629325 Please copy the link and access it from a different browser. Make sure to delete all cache, cookies, history from device. Logout and login to Amazon account and try to access the link, it will redirect you to Amazon app where you can connect with our team via chat. -Indhu

• 
  SYuuko (@SmugYuuko39258) reported 14 minutes ago

  @jamestalarico CLEARLY this is the main issue of the day - people working at Amazon. This retard @jamestalarico as all the best takes!

• 
  Gaurav Yadav (@gaurav251290) reported 18 minutes ago

  @AmazonHelp @amazonIN Order has not been shipped yet and today is the delivery date. Does aamzon india working on issue resoltuion or should i file case against you guys after that you guys will work?

• 
  The Lonely Guy!!! (@abdullahikambaa) reported 19 minutes ago

  @AmazonHelp Whenever I get there they usually redirect me to an order that was cancelled. Any phone number or email that I can lodge this particular issue, please kindly assist

• 
  Adam (@opusmcfeely) reported 19 minutes ago

  @AntoineRichard I’ve had that problem with Amazon as well. Where I don’t have that problem is with my physical media. #PhysicalMediaMatters

• 
  Laxmikant Lokhande (@L_Lokhande) reported 20 minutes ago

  @AmazonHelp This chat window is of no use. There are robots on the window who don't understand the issue.

• 
  sottovoce (@sottovoceinora) reported 24 minutes ago

  @kpmaloyauthor Goodreads, Amazon, my blog, Bookbub. But Amazon is tricky, they have taken down my reviews before for no reasons, and they don't accept reciprocal reviews.

• 
  John Douthitt (@JohnDouthitt1) reported 28 minutes ago

  @AmazonHelp I spent almost $400 for a gift that your driver failed to deliver & then lied because I was told he was coming back. He never showed up today & never came back. This address hasn’t been an issue before & now it is? To hide behind automated “service” is terrible & a joke.

• 
  Brian Sheryl (@SheShePawPaw) reported 29 minutes ago

  @AntoineRichard Same issue on Amazon-once they lose the rights to a movie, you lose your digital purchase.

• 
  Not your Business (@nyb2know) reported 31 minutes ago

  @KadenDane @Whiplash437 I grew up on a farm, ranch.. nothing we raised, butchered ourselves was THIS.. it was ALL clean and respected. USA. Vegetarians eat a lot of SOY.. that is destroying the AMAZON forests! Deforesting it miles at a time to grow soy for your diet. You are part of the problem..

• 
  Nehal choudhary 🔆 (@nehaljain_123) reported 32 minutes ago

  @baverrley @amazonindia @amazon I get your point. 👍 Healthy competition is important, and customers should always have alternatives. But for me, the immediate issue is simply getting the product I actually ordered and having Amazon properly investigate when something goes wrong.

• 
  Sherry (@SherryMcjmama84) reported 33 minutes ago

  @jamestalarico I hope Amazon sues the **** out of you for this terrible lie!!

• 
  Drakc (@Drakc16) reported 34 minutes ago

  @amazon @amazonIN It's a serious business issue they can't even provide the delivery partner no. And the toll free no which they provide remain engaged entire day, wasted my money, time and energy in this

• 
  Chuck Hollis (@KeyboardChuck) reported 37 minutes ago

  Hello @ElysiumHQ you're losing a longtime customer. I can't deal with your @Shopify fulfillment system anymore. I've asked you to fix it for years, but nada. Every year I travel between two addresses. Lots of retired people do the same. Summer and winter are different. Every other fulfillment system can handle this, yours doesn't. You won't let me uniformly change my delivery address from "A" to "B". When I can't do it for myself, I'm invited to speak to one of your customer service people, who often will screw it up on my behalf. I'm tired of my subscriptions going missing because you can't get the customer service basics right. It should be easy, right? Just send things to this other address. Amazon, here I come! I'll probably save money in the process as well.

• 
  Jiggy (@tweetsbyjiggy) reported 38 minutes ago

  @nehaljain_123 @amazonindia @amazon this kind of issues are happening frequently with amazon. The trust on amazon is reducing. Its Better to go and buy from local shop these days.

• 
  Wee Stocks (@WeeStocks) reported 41 minutes ago

  Amazon $AMZN is about to find out whether drone delivery is actually a business, rather than just a very good demo. Prime Air operates from only 11 US locations today. Amazon wants that to become nearly 500 cities and towns by the end of 2026, which is a huge jump in a few months. The drones are the obvious bit, but I’m more interested in what happens to delivery costs if this starts working at scale. More than 60% of Amazon’s most frequently bought items are apparently small and light enough to go by drone. Think chargers, cosmetics, medicine, small electronics and household bits. Anything under roughly 5 lb and around shoebox size. Some deliveries can be at the customer’s house within 30 minutes. Amazon has already made hundreds of thousands of drone deliveries this year and wants to reach 500 million a year by the end of the decade. Ambitious, yes, but the reason for trying is pretty straightforward. Amazon has spent years making warehouses faster and more automated. The awkward bit is still the final journey to your house. Vans, drivers, traffic, fuel, routes, failed deliveries. It all costs money. A drone doesn’t sit in traffic and it doesn’t need to spend 20 minutes driving between two houses. Industry estimates suggest drone delivery costs could eventually get down to around $2 per parcel. I wouldn’t treat that number as gospel, but it gives you an idea why Amazon is interested. Prime members currently pay $2.99 for drone orders below $50 and nothing extra above $50. Non Prime customers pay $4.99. So if Amazon can eventually deliver some small parcels for less than it costs to send a van, this stops being a novelty very quickly. The retail business is already getting better too. North American sales rose 16% last quarter to $116.2bn, while operating income from the region increased to $9.1bn, from $7.5bn a year earlier. Across Amazon, operating income rose 43% to $27.5bn. Prime Air is obviously tiny beside those numbers for now, and there are plenty of reasons this could stumble. Noise complaints, local approvals, weather, payload limits and, above everything else, safety. One serious accident could slow the whole rollout. That’s why the next few months are worth watching. Going from 11 locations to nearly 500 cities and towns is aggressive enough that we should soon find out whether Amazon has cracked something useful here or whether drone delivery remains a niche service with good PR. Wall Street is still firmly positive on Amazon. Current consensus is a Strong Buy, with an average target around $327, roughly 25% above the recent share price. There’s no dividend, so nobody is buying Amazon for income. I also wouldn’t suddenly value the company higher because a drone can drop off someone’s AirPods in half an hour. But if Amazon eventually shifts hundreds of millions of small parcels without needing a van and driver for the final leg, that is worth paying attention to. Delivery is expensive. If Amazon can make that part cheaper, the droneswill matter a lot more.

• 
  Macy Evatt (@MacyEvatt) reported 41 minutes ago

  So far as far as Volt goes we have the script for the first issue approved and the cover of the comic drawn. We are starting with the backstory of the character, and we're going to be selling on Amazon so keep your eyes out #comic #comicart #indiecomic

• 
  Kirk Patrick Miller (@Chaos2Cured) reported 41 minutes ago

  @FinanceLancelot Oracle, Amazon, Microsoft and Google are all in on this. It is one giant mess. Why they are trying to lock down open source and steal our freedom of choice. Yes, I mean to phrase it just like this. •

• 
  Adam Deem 🇮🇪 (@Adamdeem) reported 43 minutes ago

  @Lordoftheringsu I have a business proposal for Amazon: You give me just 100 million dollars, I will kick you in the ***** really hard and you will be much better off than if you continue down this path.

• 
  Marc Burrows (@20thcenturymarc) reported 44 minutes ago

  @intothetardis_ @Heliant76339249 Plus the writers they brought in to fix it were Gaimanites and it’s pretty clear he was influencing them behind the scenes whether Amazon sanctioned it or not.

• 
  #IamShan (@06_santanu) reported 45 minutes ago

  @AmazonHelp Absolutely unhelpful, this is not the eay of resolving the issue . No one is helping here and @amazonIN is keeping irresponsible people. Same with @delhivery , I need this to be addressed and the link given is not working

• 
  Shanaka Anslem Perera ⚡ (@shanaka86) reported 46 minutes ago

  Some server builders are pulling 128GB memory modules out and putting 32GB back in!! TrendForce reported on 9th July that some systems are shifting down from 96GB and 128GB modules to 64GB and 32GB, and that total RDIMM bit supply will grow only 15% to 20% next year, well behind server CPU shipments. That is the wrong direction in my opinon, and it is happening while Amazon, Microsoft, Alphabet and Meta raise combined capital spending from $410 billion last year to $725 billion this year. Cutting the module does not get you out. Conventional DRAM contract prices rose 93% to 98% in the first quarter, which is TrendForce's realised figure and not a forecast. Its ranges then put the second quarter at 58% to 63% and the third at 13% to 18%. Compound the midpoints and the index sits near 3.62 times the fourth quarter of last year. Halve the bits at 3.62 times the price and the bill is still about 81% higher than it was. One printed quarter and two forecast ranges. Say so when you quote it. Ask what server memory costs today and five sources give five answers! All five are correct. Three of them are prices from three different markets and the other two are not prices at all. Up 13% to 18% this quarter is a contract price. Around 3.62 times is the compounded index since 4Q25. A 64GB DDR5-5600 module going from the mid $300s last September to $2,841 in June is Fusion Worldwide's open market average, which is broker clearing rather than an OEM agreement. Bit supply growing 15% to 20% next year is physics, not price. Capacity per slot cut by half or more is rationing. Anyone quoting one of those without saying which is quoting a random number. On the long term agreements the attribution matters. Fusion puts more than 30% of DDR5 volume under firm multi-year contracts over the next two years. TrendForce said only that several US cloud providers hold such agreements and that these restrict suppliers from raising prices for those clients, and it quantified nothing. Two sources, two different claims, routinely reported as one. High bandwidth memory is a separate market on separate contracts and this is not happening there. This is host and conventional DRAM, which is where the general cloud fleet lives, and that fleet is the part of the business already earning revenue. That arithmetic runs through every AI capex number published this year. If memory is 10% of system cost and memory prices went up 3.62 times, a dollar of capex now buys what 79 cents bought before. At a 5% memory share it is 88 cents. At 15% it is 72 cents. So capex that grew 77% in dollars grew about 40% in machines at a 10% memory share, and about 27% at 15%. Every ratio the market uses to turn AI spending into racks or megawatts was calibrated when memory got cheaper more often than not. Before you turn any AI dollar figure into hardware, divide it first.

• 
  HustleBitch (@HustleBitch_) reported 48 minutes ago

  🚨 AN AMERICAN IN TOKYO SHOWED HER MONTHLY BILLS — AMERICANS ARE HAVING A MELTDOWN A student living in Tokyo just posted her total bills for the month and the comments section is pure chaos. Electric + gas (AC running nonstop in the summer heat): ¥8,218 Water: ¥1,232 Health insurance: ¥830 Phone (unlimited): ¥4,075 Amazon Prime + YouTube Premium + Netflix: a few thousand more Grand total: ¥15,941 — roughly $100. Americans are staring at the numbers in disbelief. The same basic utilities and subscriptions in the U.S. regularly cost three or four times that. Even with Tokyo’s minimum wage factored in, people are saying the comparison is brutal. Would you move across the world if it meant your monthly bills looked like this… or is the U.S. cost of living just completely broken?

• 
  Ruben Camacho (@RubenCamacho) reported 49 minutes ago

  @DealsFinderIO Amazon code not working

• 
  Tcherina Combe (@CombeTcher42137) reported 50 minutes ago

  @lolnvmtho I just had a lazy *** driver lie about why my package wasn't delivered today and I saw him outside delivering packages next door but left nothing for me. customer service is also the shits! Is Amazon going down ???

• 
  JUST!N (@justinsomuch) reported 56 minutes ago

  @yourmombeats Ok you use Google Amazon and x. The government uses ai. It’s literally unavoidable. I know you want to take a moral stance but I just view it as hypocritical and liken it to being vegan or recycling as if your personal choice has a major or even small effect on fixing the issue.

• 
  FindleysFinance (@FindleysFinance) reported 58 minutes ago

  @sabrinaoptions Hands down, yes they are. I only just started my position in Amazon 2 months ago. Meta, I've doubled down this year.