Telstra outages and service status in Westbury, Tasmania

Problems in the last 24 hours in Westbury, Tasmania

The chart below shows the number of Telstra reports we have received in the last 24 hours from users in Westbury, Tasmania and surrounding areas. An outage is declared when the number of reports exceeds the baseline, represented by the red line.

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.

Telstra Issues Reports Near Westbury, Tasmania

Latest outage, problems and issue reports in Westbury and nearby locations:

• 
  Karina Dambergs (@KarinaDambergs) reported 24 minutes ago from Deloraine, Tasmania

  @jriewolod @Telstra I know it’s slow, but I second the comments to take it to an ombudsman. I am sorry for your mum, but sadly not surprised - I have nothing but billing issues with Telstra. They always want us to pay first and then they’ll sort it out.

Telstra Issues Reports

Latest outage, problems and issue reports in social media:

• 
  Brett Cousins (@BrettWCousins) reported 7 minutes ago

  Boarded the Spirit of Tasmania Monday. Departed 6.45pm. Surging deep into the blackened waters of Bass Strait about 8.45, I lost the @Telstra network. It bravely held for 2 hours of glorious sea going connectivity. So why can’t I get a bloody #Telstra signal in #Elwood?!!

• 
  bitterboy (@twistedandbitte) reported 9 minutes ago

  @Telstra Will now take this up with the Ombudsman, asking them to note it is resolved in favour of the customer and the delay in responding is your deliberate attempt to delay compensation. Stick that where it fits, or where the sun don’t shine.

• 
  Senator Sarah Henderson (@SenSHenderson) reported 10 minutes ago

  Anika Wells’ claim 'the industry must learn from its mistakes' following a damning report into the catastrophic Telstra outage is not good enough.  The collapse of Telstra’s mobile network on 8 July this year caused chaos with payment systems, shut down train networks, and stopped some people calling triple zero. Mobile telecommunications networks are critical infrastructure.  That is why, on the day of the outage, the Coalition called on the government to urgently deliver mobile network reliability standards.  There must be appropriate minimum standards in place governing the reliability, performance, and maintenance of our mobile networks with significant penalties when those standards are breached.  Asking telcos to 'rebuild trust with Australians by ensuring networks do not succumb to preventable failures’, as the minister stated today, is like hitting the telcos with a piece of wet lettuce.  The minister’s silence on the need for a tougher regulatory framework is deafening.

• 
  BOB ACHMAR (@maroniteMAGA) reported 12 minutes ago

  @FreedmFightr1 Too many personal info,,, ffs Telstra origin and how many others got hacked,,, what says census won’t get hacked,, seriously wtf 🤬 I believe massive fine possible jail if not completed

• 
  Romire 🇦🇺 (@RomireTV) reported 13 minutes ago

  @AshConnell Well Telstra and Optus both had system network failures, and they cant even take responsibility for it

• 
  C³ vie (@kianameilover) reported 18 minutes ago

  @andronauts @KarmicVictim if only Melbournes was reliable 💔 i remember getting stranded in the city bc of some telstra outage and was forced to book $200 hotel to not die from cold urticaria djajdjsjdj, sydney PT is nice and the Melbourne trams tho

• 
  Joseph Thomas (@j_seph_th_mas) reported 18 minutes ago

  Twelve live Australian job ads integrate AI in the title with enablement, transformation, automation, or change. Only ten companies have posted them. HESTA is hiring an “Enterprise AI Enablement Lead,” TAL an “AI and Automation Lead,”  IAG an “AI and Automation Principal.” Aware Super wants an “AI Strategy Change Lead”. CBA’s is a financial crime compliance role, and Insignia Financial’s is in risk. Four engineering roles at Canva, Xero, and Telstra. Which leaves two, and both are at EY. One is an “Associate Partner - Solutions Architect - AI Transformation,” sold through its Microsoft alliance. The other is a “Transformation and AI Marketing Leader” on a 12-month parental leave cover to take EY’s AI transformation offering to market. It’s the only live Australian marketing role in the twelve, and the AI capability it asks for- advanced use of Copilot, ChatGPT, and Perplexity- is in the optional skills. I built a workforce intelligence platform, and I’m analysing how AI is being written into new job roles. As of 27th August 2026, it holds 1,603 live Australian specs across 102 companies. Of 1,522 live marketing specs globally, 232 are AI-central, roles where AI is core or supporting the work as written. Of those, 179 (77.2%) carry no decision architecture. Nothing about who checks the model or who can override it, and no one is named accountable for what it produces. Across all functions, it’s 65.1%. Marketing is 12.1 points worse. Australian marketing is 101 live specs. Eight are AI-central, and seven of them have zero decision architecture. A CMO who hasn’t hired for this borrows it from an agency. Agencies post AI-central roles in 13.3% of 2,763 live specs. The banks and insurers they pitch to post them in 13.2% of 2,261. The seller and the buyer are hiring at the same rate. One Australian marketing team has written the role properly. NAB advertised a Head of Agentic Marketing in May, asking the hire to support the “redesign of marketing operating models and workflows using AI agents,” with humans kept in the loop and someone named accountable for what the agents produce. It scored 4 out of 4 in decision architecture, the only Australian marketing spec in 402 to do so. It hasn’t been live since 7th June 2026.

• 
  Ray (@rayethesis) reported 20 minutes ago

  This chart puts Starlink’s scale into perspective. At roughly $11.4B in annualized revenue, Starlink is already approaching the revenue scale of established telecom giants such as Singtel and sits in the same neighborhood as Telstra. That is remarkable considering Starlink is a relatively young satellite broadband network competing against companies that have spent decades building terrestrial infrastructure, spectrum portfolios, and massive subscriber bases. The important signal here is not just the absolute revenue, but how quickly Starlink has reached a level that takes traditional telecom companies decades to build. However, the comparison also exposes the problem. Telecom is a huge business, but it is not necessarily a high-growth business. Companies like China Mobile, Verizon, Deutsche Telekom, AT&T and NTT generate tens or even hundreds of billions in annual revenue, yet the market typically assigns them much lower growth expectations because connectivity eventually becomes a mature utility. Starlink has a better growth profile today because it is still penetrating underserved markets, adding capacity, expanding internationally, and converting new customers. But as the revenue base moves from $10B toward $20B, $30B and beyond, the question becomes whether Starlink can maintain venture-like growth rates while operating inside what is ultimately a telecom market. The bullish argument is that Starlink is not exactly a traditional telecom company. Its satellite constellation gives SpaceX a global distribution network that terrestrial operators struggle to replicate, particularly in rural areas, developing markets, maritime, aviation and other difficult-to-connect environments. There is also optionality around direct-to-device connectivity, enterprise services, government contracts and potentially other satellite applications. If those businesses become meaningful revenue streams, Starlink could evolve from simply being "satellite internet" into a broader space infrastructure platform. That would justify a much more aggressive valuation than simply capitalizing Starlink like another telecom operator. But this is where I think investors need to be careful with the SpaceX hype. A $11.4B revenue run-rate sounds enormous, but revenue alone does not determine the quality of the business. Starlink requires enormous capital expenditure to deploy and replenish satellites, ground infrastructure and user terminals, while bandwidth economics and competition will determine how much of that revenue eventually becomes free cash flow. The really interesting question is not whether Starlink can reach $20B or $30B in revenue. It is whether SpaceX can continue compounding revenue rapidly without Starlink becoming just another giant, capital-intensive telecom business. My take: SpaceX is incredibly cool, and Starlink reaching ~$11.4B of annual revenue is genuinely impressive. But if the main growth engine for the SpaceX story is ultimately just telecom, I'm much less excited. A bigger Starlink is great, but a bigger telecom company alone does not create an extraordinary valuation. The real upside comes if Starlink becomes the cash-flow engine that funds a much larger SpaceX ecosystem: launch, defense, direct-to-device, satellite infrastructure and eventually entirely new space-based businesses. Starlink is impressive but starlink alone is not enough. $SPCX

• 
  Liza 🥓 🇦🇺 (@RobynLiza) reported 21 minutes ago

  @RoadknightThe When i ring anyone for help these days like telstra etc if they ask if im indigenous i say yes. I always get through quick, this is all a scam and she is less than 3% indigenous which means she is who she hates colonial

• 
  Ray G Kosanjic (@kosanjic) reported 22 minutes ago

  @PeterD84508 @DHughesy You idiot. Both sides of parliament agreed to sell. It was costing Australians hundreds of millions as a public service model. If Telstra was government owned now we’d be further down a hole.