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 (46%)
• Errors (32%)
• Sign in (23%)

Live Outage Map

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

City	Problem Type	Report Time
Cherbourg-Octeville	Sign in	2 hours ago
Penzberg	Sign in	4 hours ago
Seattle	Errors	21 hours ago
Wiesbaden	Errors	2 days ago
Columbus	Website Down	2 days ago
Indianapolis	Errors	3 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:

• 
  Deborah (@DeborahHat96840) reported 7 minutes ago

  $HPNN #Digitalage NFA NLA NBS You are responsible for performing your own discovery. Today’s post breaks down the latest Digitalage promotional graphic claiming creators can “own” their identity, rights, audience, and economics. No product, infrastructure, or legal framework supports the claims. In fact, Digitalage’s own Terms of Service assign those rights to Digitalage — not creators. 1. The Graphic Claims a Rights Architecture That Does Not Exist The infographic presents a system of: Creator‑controlled identity Creator‑controlled licensing Creator‑controlled audience validation Creator‑controlled economics None of these systems exist. Digitalage has: No platform No infrastructure No identity protocol No rights‑management engine No economic framework No creator tools No SDK, API, or documentation The graphic describes a fictional ecosystem, not a functioning technology. 2. “NOT A PLATFORM. INFRASTRUCTURE.” Is False Advertising Infrastructure requires: Architecture Protocols Operational systems Documentation Deployment Reliability metrics Digitalage has none of these. Calling itself “infrastructure” is a branding tactic, not a factual statement. 3. The “Owned Media Assets” Column Is Marketing Fiction The graphic claims creators “own” their: Identity Rights Audience Economics But Digitalage’s own Terms of Service grant Digitalage: Worldwide Perpetual Irrevocable Royalty‑free Fully transferable Fully sublicensable Commercial‑use rights This is the opposite of creator ownership. 4. The “Rented vs Owned” Comparison Is Misleading The graphic implies Digitalage solves the problem of creators “renting” access on platforms like Meta, TikTok, YouTube. But Digitalage: Has no platform Has no tools Has no infrastructure Has no rights framework It cannot provide “ownership” because nothing exists to own. 5. The Benzinga Link Is Partner Promotional Content Partner content is: Sponsored Paid Non‑editorial Non‑investigative It does not validate any claims. 6. The Amazon Stock Card Is Misleading Including AMZN’s stock card implies: Parity with Amazon Association with Amazon Infrastructure equivalence None of these are true. It’s decorative noise meant to create false legitimacy. THE CRITICAL EVIDENCE: DIGITALAGE TOS CONTRADICTS THE GRAPHIC Digitalage’s Terms of Service (May 16, 2026) require creators to grant Digitalage a broad commercial license over all content. Allowed excerpt (1–2 lines): You grant Digitalage a worldwide, perpetual, irrevocable, royalty‑free license to use, reproduce, modify, distribute, and create derivative works from your content. This single line destroys the infographic’s claims of: “Your identity” “Your rights” “Your economics” “Owned media assets” “Creator‑controlled licensing” Digitalage’s contract assigns those rights to Digitalage, not creators. PUBLIC CONCLUSION The infographic claims creators own their identity, rights, audience, and economics, but Digitalage’s Terms of Service grant Digitalage a perpetual, irrevocable, royalty‑free commercial license over all creator content. Digitalage cannot claim to provide “owned media assets” or “creator‑controlled rights” when its own contract assigns those rights to itself. The graphic is marketing fiction that directly contradicts Digitalage’s legal terms.

• 
  Avinash Desai (@Avirajadesai) reported 7 minutes ago

  @AmazonHelp @amazonIN customer care agent initially assured issue will be resolved in 24 hours and second time they said it Will take 3 days time.

• 
  Suzy Redd (@suzy_redd) reported 9 minutes ago

  @MiddleAgedBaby2 @amazon I fired them in January of 21 and have had no trouble spending money since.

• 
  Shveta (@TrustScore_1) reported 11 minutes ago

  3,300 people at Uber woke up today with a job and went to bed without one. Most of them did nothing wrong. That's the part nobody says. They hit their numbers. They got good reviews. They were just sitting on the wrong side of a spreadsheet. Oracle: 25,000+. Amazon: 16,000. 123,305 tech jobs gone in 2026 already, more than all of last year. And the number that keeps me up: US new-grad unemployment is 5.7%. Higher than the general workforce. For the first time in decades, the degree made things worse. India is the same story in a different accent. TCS cut 23,000 in one year. Net IT hiring fell from 600,000 in FY22 to 140,000 in FY26. Entry-level openings down 44%. A 22 yr old in Bengaluru did everything her parents told her to do. Coaching. Ranks. CS degree. Placement week came and went. Here is the sentence that explains all of it: Indian IT revenue grew 6.1% last year. Headcount grew 2.3%. For 30 years the business was people × hours × rate. That equation just broke. Broken equations do not re-link. If your work is testing, L1 support, documentation, ticket triage, boilerplate code, or managing six people who do that, this is not a bad quarter. This is a deletion. I'm not going to soften that. But don't stop reading here, because the other half is real too: AI/ML postings up 163%, then another 74%. AI Engineer is now the fastest-growing job title in America. AI skills pay a 62% premium. India's GCCs will add 4.25 lakh jobs this year. Nomura counted 83,100 AI hires in India against 31,921 losses. The jobs didn't die. They moved. And nobody sent you the forwarding address. So here it is: The next 24 months hire for AI and agent engineers, evals and red-teaming, MLOps and inference cost, data and context engineering, AI governance and audit, forward-deployed engineers, security for agentic systems, and domain experts who can direct a model instead of competing with one. Two tracks exist now. Build the AI. Or use it to do 10x your old job. There is no third track. The third track is the list. The cruelest line in the Nomura report: displaced workers rarely become AI hires. The hiring is real. It just doesn't go to the same people. Unless you make it.

• 
  Feisty Renegade 🗣🙀🙏⚓ (@MsRobotoFL) reported 13 minutes ago

  @ABC Really? Gee, I can't understand why when your boy BIDEN refused to refill it while he was wandering off into the Amazon jungle, and falling down stairs!

• 
  @me bro (@Obi_Juan1989) reported 13 minutes ago

  @trinity2pointO I bought me a seatbelt on Amazon and lock myself down on the seated ones. Makes a huge difference in ham tension.

• 
  Suyog Jain (@jainsuyogj) reported 13 minutes ago

  @AmazonHelp @AmazonHelp I have contacted the support team. I was supposed to receive order today. I had to stay home to do so. This is the second time. Kindle escalate this issue. I have already reached out with no proper escalation path or a number I can use to know my order status

• 
  Titan Company Limited (@TitanCompanyLtd) reported 15 minutes ago

  @PPrasan15755565 Hi, we understand that the return window for your order has closed, and this has been a frustrating experience. As the purchase was made through Amazon, we kindly request that you escalate the issue with Amazon support for further assistance regarding your order.

• 
  Nicolás Echeverría (@nicoecheveb) reported 16 minutes ago

  Most operators confuse a failed mechanism with a flawed thesis. Amazon Auctions failed because auction friction didn't fit retail, not because 3P aggregation was wrong. High-agency execution means keeping the macro destination fixed while ruthlessly swapping broken mechanisms.

• 
  APOSIMZ (@geemirae) reported 19 minutes ago

  @AmazonHelp My questions are: 1. Why can't i log into US Amazon when Amazon Japan login is possible; 2. When I log into Amazon Japan, why do i get kicked out when I change the region to US?

• 
  FrugalBC (@frugalbc) reported 24 minutes ago

  Finacee work me up in the middle of the night because she heard a loud pop and a bright flash from her TV. She thought it was an issue with the outlet. It turned out to be a pop that some Amazon Fire TVs get. I wonder how many people got freaked out by this? Wild.

• 
  Finance Mastering (@finmastering) reported 28 minutes ago

  AI Layoffs at Microsoft, Amazon, Meta Drive Seattle Luxury Home Sales Down 15% #FinanceMastering

• 
  Vonner (@Vonner) reported 32 minutes ago

  @mnwild @PrimeVideo Ouch. The Amazon prime app is terrible and I avoid it as much as possible.

• 
  Skyler Davila (@SkylerDavilan0s) reported 35 minutes ago

  @AmazonHelp @amazon Hey Waya typical of @amazon support to not look at the actual problem!

• 
  Hintze (@Hintzeboy5) reported 36 minutes ago

  @BitgetWalletAF @lavieestbelIe You can buy broken plates on Amazon and no, that’s probably not real gold.

• 
  MMQuimby (@MMQuimby) reported 38 minutes ago

  .@amazon Please fix your return QR code UI. Bringing up QR codes at the return store is impractical, and I can't just print the page you give me anymore. I now have to screenshot, open the screenshot in Preview, and print it. Super ridiculous.

• 
  Iso Ledger (@JamesDula82) reported 41 minutes ago

  The Stable Coin fight. 21 banks and asset managers, Bank of America, Citi, Goldman Sachs, Deutsche Bank, UBS, Wells Fargo, Santander, MUFG, Fidelity, are forming a company to launch a dollar stablecoin in the first half of 2027. No name yet. No chain picked yet. Big names. Big headline. A second group is already ahead of them. 37 European banks under Qivalis are building a euro stablecoin, targeting the second half of this year if the Dutch licence comes through. And it is not just those two clubs. Meta is back in payments four years after Libra, this time using someone else's dollar token instead of issuing its own. Walmart and Amazon have explored proprietary coins for checkout. A separate group of 140 plus firms, including Stripe, Visa, Mastercard, and BlackRock, is standing up Open USD for later this year. Everybody wants a branded token. Almost nobody has proven anyone will hold it. A crowded field of issuers. Overlapping timelines. Each one convinced their name on the coin is what wins. I've seen this movie before. Different props. Around 1908 there were hundreds of carmakers in America. Everyone racing to be the brand that survived. By mid century the market had collapsed into a handful of names, Ford, GM, Chrysler. Almost anyone who tried to pick the individual winner in 1910 picked wrong. The roads got built anyway. The gas stations got built anyway. The steel supply chains got built anyway. You did not need Ford over Packard to benefit from the automobile era. You needed exposure to what the whole industry required no matter who won. Same pattern with fiber. Hundreds of billions went into cable in the late 90s. Dozens of companies were sure they would own the winning network. Most of them went bankrupt when the bubble popped. WorldCom is still one of the largest collapses in US history. The glass in the ground did not disappear. It got bought out of bankruptcy for pennies and became the backbone every data center and stream still runs on. That is the setup now. Banks, retailers, card networks, platforms, all spending to put their logo on a dollar or a euro that already exists in someone else's wallet. Société Générale already ran the experiment. They were first among major banks with a dollar stablecoin last year. They did not even make the proprietary chain mistake. They issued on public Ethereum and Solana. Being first, and being right about the rail, still got them about 12.5 million dollars in circulation. That is the receipt. First mover means almost nothing when distribution and trust are the actual product. So here is where I land. I am not picking the 21 firm token, or Qivalis, or Open USD, or whatever Meta ends up plugging into. I would not have picked Ford over Studebaker in 1910 either. Let them fight. Let them burn capital proving whose token anyone actually holds. What is worth owning is the layer underneath the fight. The plumbing that has to work no matter whose name is on the winning coin. Interoperability between systems that do not talk to each other natively. Settlement that does not care whose logo is moving. The messaging and liquidity rails every one of these projects still has to sit on top of. They are about to spend the next year and a half proving they can distribute a coin. Banks already proved they could build one, a decade ago, across a dozen dead consortium experiments. The question was never whether they could issue. It is whether anyone will use it once it is live. Capital does not solve that by itself. We do not need to pick the winner. We need to own what sits under the fight. 🛡

• 
  Barathan (@Barathan19) reported 41 minutes ago

  @amazonindia @AmazonHelp This is extremely disappointing. I ordered a Nothing Phone 3 on 29 Aug specifically to gift my wife this week. Despite repeated assurances, the delivery on 31 Aug failed, and the same issue continues today. Calls to the delivery person are being ignored.

• 
  Amazon Help (@AmazonHelp) reported 42 minutes ago

  @RajakPalash @RajakPalash Please copy the link > paste the link in any web browser > login into your Amazon account > reach out to our team via chat. If you're still facing an issue, please reach out to us with the error of the same for further help. -Likhita

• 
  Amin (@eCom_Amin) reported 43 minutes ago

  fable 5.1 is insanely CRACKED at finding winning google ads angles to scale your brand past $1m/mo research capacities literally DOUBLED so here's every prompt you'll need to reverse-engineer competitors' funnels and rip some banger gads based on it: (actually run them all rn, don't just save this) 1. load the brain before you ask it anything the research is only as sharp as the context. upload: - pdps - reviews - website - funnel pages - competitors - report CSVs - brand docs - ICP info - winners - losers literally everything then run this: "act as the angle research lead for this brand. read everything uploaded and build a working profile: ICP segments ranked by revenue, the pain points in the customer's own words, the objections ordered by how often they appear, the proof we already own, and the beliefs a buyer must hold before purchasing. do not propose angles yet. summarise what you found, then tell me what context is MISSING" that last instruction is the whole game. prompt engineering is cope just have claude tell you what he needs from you and give it to him. anybody who disagrees just loves to overcomplicate things. 2. mine untapped databases that semrush misses prompt: "search reddit threads, quora answers, amazon reviews and Q&A sections, youtube comments on competitor and category videos, tiktok comments, trustpilot, and niche forums for people discussing [PROBLEM CATEGORY]. extract VERBATIM language, never paraphrase. for each goldmine you find, give me this: the quote, the pain underneath it, what they already tried, why it failed them, the outcome they want, and the emotional state behind it" paraphrasing is how angles end up sounding like ai slop. the whole value is in knowing your ICP's EXACT words and repeating them on ads. 3. reverse engineer every competitor funnel end to end "research [COMPETITOR 1, 2, 3]. use google ads transparency center, meta ad library, their landing pages, checkout flow and email capture. for each: every live ad and where it routes, the landing page TYPE, the hero promise, the mechanism they claim, the proof they lead with, the objections handled and in what order, the offer and guarantee, and what they are NOT saying" then: "for each competitor page, tell me which awareness level it was built for. then identify which of their traffic is landing on the wrong page type" this is how you find gaps in your competitors strategies that you can capitalize on 4. diagnose market sophistication BEFORE choosing an angle this is the step 9 out of 10 brands skip and it decides whether your angle has any chance: "assess the market sophistication level for [CATEGORY] using schwartz's 5 stages. analyse competitor ads and landing pages as evidence. stage 1 means nobody has made the claim yet. stage 2 means claims are escalating. stage 3 means mechanism differentiation has started. stage 4 means mechanisms are competing. stage 5 means the market is exhausted and identification wins. tell me which stage we're in, the evidence, and what type of angle still works at this stage" if your category is at stage 4, a bigger promise does nothing. every competitor already made one. if you're operating in stage 5, the mechanism is exhausted too, and the strategy has to shift again your ad is only good if it resonates with the market it operates in 5. score every angle against awareness and funnel stage "from the research, generate 15 google ad angles for my brand. for each: the awareness level it serves, the funnel stage it belongs in, the sophistication stage it's valid at, whether it's validated by competitors or white space, the proof required to run it, and the funnel type it should be tested through. rank by expected impact and flag any we lack proof to support" an angle without proof is a claim. claude will rank those last 6. map the keywords to the angles, not the products "build the keyword universe for [BRAND] using the customer language and competitor research. split into branded, competitor, problem-aware symptom queries, solution-aware category queries, comparison, use-case, and occasion. tag each with awareness level, the angle it pairs with, the funnel type it routes to, and the campaign that should own it" this will make everything nice and organized 7. turn the research into the campaign plan "turn everything above into a 30-day google ads launch plan for this specific brand, its AOV, margin structure and market sophistication stage. for each campaign, give me: the angle it carries, the keyword cluster, the landing page type, the creative direction, and the signal that decides whether it scales, holds, or gets cut. separate must-launch from phase 2 tests" then: "tell me which 3 angles to test first and why, given our sophistication stage and the proof we currently own" and that's literally it your competitors are testing angles with fat budgets while you analyze it all, learn from their mistakes, and (ethically) rip their winners with a unique twist and if you want me to audit your brand's google ads angles using this system and show you how we'd capitalize on the winning ones... DM me "OPP"

• 
  Maksym (@maks_mak_0) reported 44 minutes ago

  Rufus "beta" popping out over my search results and "X" button not working is super frustrating. Do you guys test what you ship anymore? @amazon

• 
  Cody "CheesyGrunt" Mackall (@cody_mackall) reported 50 minutes ago

  I wrote the whole story down. It's called I'm Fine, out now on Amazon.

• 
  Heidrun Beer (@beer_heidrun) reported 50 minutes ago

  If you let the clock run backward past Paris and past the coal age, the planet does not look like a machine that only recently learned heat. About fifty-six million years ago, in a pulse scientists call the Paleocene–Eocene Thermal Maximum, a huge slug of carbon hit the air — from volcanoes and from buried carbon that got loose. Global temperature jumped something like five to eight degrees Celsius and stayed high for tens of thousands of years. There were no ice sheets. Crocodiles lived near the Arctic. The tropics were so hot that some sea life failed. That world was not a myth. It was a different arrangement of continents, plants, and carbon, and it took the better part of a hundred thousand years to cool. Closer to us: the last interglacial, about 125,000 years ago, was roughly half a degree to one and a half degrees warmer than the late 1800s, with seas several metres higher. The middle of our own Holocene, around six thousand years ago, ran a few tenths of a degree warmer in the global average, and much warmer in northern summers, because the Earth’s tilt pointed more sun at the north. Greenland and parts of Europe remember that as a milder age, not as an apocalypse. So the sentence “Earth has never been this warm” is false if you mean the whole history of the rock. It is closer to true if you mean: not this warm, this fast, with this much ice still to lose, and with cities built on the old high-water mark. What in the models is solid, and what is costume? Solid: carbon dioxide traps heat. That is nineteenth-century physics, measured in laboratories, visible on every planet with a thick air. Solid: humans have added a lot of it. Ice cores and flasks agree. Solid: the last 150 years of thermometer and satellite records show a rise of about 1.4 degrees Celsius from that late-1800s baseline. The costume is the extra decimal. How much the world warms for a doubling of carbon dioxide is still a range — most assessments sit somewhere near three degrees Celsius, with honest tails from about two to five — because clouds are the wild card. Models disagree with each other over the equatorial Pacific and over low clouds. Some recent papers push the number up; some ice-age reconstructions push it down. Treating a single model run as a weather forecast for your grandchild’s city is the myth. Treating carbon as a harmless perfume is the other myth. The useful middle is: the direction is real, the exact landing is not a prophecy. Deforestation is not nothing, and it is not the main tap. In the 1960s, land-use change was close to half of human carbon dioxide. Now fossil fuel and cement are about nine-tenths of the yearly addition; net land-use change is around a tenth, give or take a large error bar. Gross cutting is bigger, but regrowth and new planting swallow a lot of it, which is why remaining forest land still takes carbon out of the air. The part the carbon ledger underplays is local: when you strip the Amazon or the Congo, you do not only move carbon. You change rain, shade, and the wet breath of the canopy. That is a real climate, just a shorter one than the century-scale carbon story. Stopping the cut still pays. It does not replace the coal and oil arithmetic. 2/3

• 
  Greg (@BristolPistolSr) reported 51 minutes ago

  We can be friends. Don't be so hostile. "My" drone is not "pervy;" It's highly efficient. You get your meal faster (if you don't live too far away), and no one has to drive all the way to your location (wasting their labor and the money required to pay them plus significant quantities of gasoline). A warm baked potato is far superior to a cold one. The current system for Amazon item delivery is very slow and highly polluting in that a 2-ton car or 3-ton truck must be driven around to deliver someone's 3 ounce T-shirt from Amazon. BTW, I hardly ever eat at McDonalds. China's occasionally wise parliament has determined that both drone technology and drone delivery make sense as priorities for their country. There are many things I don't like about about China (like their rapidly growing military drone FLEETS, hello?) - But placing emphasis on drones has been a big winner for them. We are rapidly falling behind a government that is far more efficient than ours in key ways. Their energy output already exceeds ours by a coefficient of 3 as I recall. That will rapidly lead to a much larger economy. We fill our parliament (Congress) with lawyers and liars. China has filled theirs with engineers.

• 
  2Pac Charts (@2PacCharts) reported 51 minutes ago

  Tupac's albums are 30% off on Amazon today. R U Still Down CDs for $8 Me Against The World CDs for $9 Makaveli vinyls for $26

• 
  Kazi Sajid (@sajid_official_) reported 55 minutes ago

  I need help , How to login in prime video with business account, I have purchased prime lite subscription! @AmazonHelp

• 
  rajiv kumar ranjan (@rajivbiv) reported 57 minutes ago

  @AmazonHelp @amazonIN @jagograhakjago Thanks , got connected via chat link , they tried to solve problem. Hope it will get solved. While, have improvement in customer service connect option in AMAZON APP to an efficient level

• 
  Amazon Help (@AmazonHelp) reported 59 minutes ago

  @CHIE_XO_ Sorry to know about the trouble you’re facing with the pricing of the product. We'd like to make sure we're providing you with the best information possible. Just to clarify, which Amazon Marketplace is your account associated with (.com, .uk, .ca, etc.)? Let us know. -Akamsha

• 
  Amy Ford (@AmyFord1492671) reported 60 minutes ago

  @major_moostache I passed that Amazon truck on my way home. I got home and saw this accident on Facebook. A guy in a uhaul truck was driving way worse than this truck driver. He was doing at least 80 and was having trouble staying in his lane because of his rate of speed

• 
  Finimize (@finimize) reported 1 hour ago

  Big Tech’s AI boom is giving profits an eye-popping boost – but not necessarily in the way investors might hope. Alphabet, Amazon, Nvidia, and Microsoft booked more than $160 billion in gains last quarter from stakes in other AI-linked companies, including OpenAI, Anthropic, and SpaceX. Those paper gains flow through the “other income” line, making headline profits look considerably healthier. The numbers are chunky. Alphabet’s other income more than doubled to $97.9 billion, while Amazon’s more than tripled to $53.4 billion. And with potential OpenAI and Anthropic listings ahead, these valuation boosts could keep coming. Trouble is, they’re not the same as cash generated by selling more cloud computing, chips, or ads. In fact, investment gains were the main driver of recent profit increases at Alphabet and Amazon. That matters because investors use earnings to judge how strongly the AI machine is really humming. Analysts reckon these one-off gains are muddying that picture and making profits look less repeatable than they really are. And there’s a sting in the tail: today’s bumper gains create tougher comparisons tomorrow, potentially setting Big Tech up for negative earnings growth. #AI #BigTech $AMZN $GOOGL $META $MSFT $NVDA