Telstra outages and service status in Proserpine, Queensland

Problems in the last 24 hours in Proserpine, Queensland

The chart below shows the number of Telstra reports we have received in the last 24 hours from users in Proserpine, Queensland 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

Latest outage, problems and issue reports in social media:

• 
  💧Daren Connor 🇦🇺 (@connor_daren) reported 8 minutes ago

  @Telstra you send me messages to say the network is having issues & use wifi calling but if the network is having issues which affects my devices then how the hell do I use wifi calling when there’s no network? How long will this be going on? This is the 4th day of these messages

• 
  Lucy Graham (@montrosegraham) reported 10 minutes ago

  @News24Aust Three people died. One person died in the more recent Telstra outage. Australians are supposed to trust the government with Digital ID?

• 
  Daniel (@VoteLewko) reported 12 minutes ago

  My predictions for the nationwide Ausalert test today at 2PM AEST. 1) Drivers whose mobile phone goes berzerk cop a $423 fine and 5 demerit points. 2) School teachers bust students who've been handing in a burner phone every morning before school. 3) Matinee session of The Odyssey interrupted causing mass rush to the toilets. 4) Spies, TV and Radio broadcasters learn the difference between mute and off when their career detonates faster than a Hezbollah pager. 5) Telstra network engineers clench hard.

• 
  Candour (@Candour100) reported 14 minutes ago

  @blu_boys @Optus Boost is by bar the cheapest as you get the full Telstra network. Belong gives you the majority and that serves my girl right as the only considerations would be travelling to remote areas.

• 
  Dane Trethowan (@grtdane) reported 17 minutes ago

  @ellensandell Poor demented greens, Telstra, Optus etc have had Data Centers around the place for years.

• 
  Ray (@rayethesis) reported 18 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

• 
  moey🇺🇾🇵🇸 (@_mqey) reported 20 minutes ago

  @Telstra @ezzh_ FIX MY ******* WIFI ****

• 
  Mark (@Markius_vini) reported 22 minutes ago

  @Starlink @Telstra Day 23 Asking Starlink to start providing service to Angola

• 
  Brent Hodgson (@BrentHodgson) reported 23 minutes ago

  @DHughesy No. Only an idiot would agree - because they'd be wrong. 1. It's not worth "over $300 billion". The $64 billion dollar investment is worth $269 billion 2. If you're using the "over 300 billion" figure ($337.2 billion) that figure means your "no future Fed Govt put one cent into it" bit is incorrect because this figure includes MULTIPLE additional multi-billion dollar funds added to the Future Fund's management portfolio. 3. The future fund wasn't built on some kind of free money windfall... The $64 billion invested came primarily from the Telstra sale. The Telstra sale meant the copper network was privatised, leading to Telstra putting shareholders first in refusing to bid on optic fibre rollouts. This meant the government has so far spent around $64 billion ($70bn by the end of the decade) to re-create Telstra's infrastructure under NBN Co. Meanwhile Telstra has paid $65-80bn in dividends since privatisation moved those dividends from public to private hands. So for every $1 we gained from the Telstra sale, we missed another $1 in dividends and spent another $1 in replacing the infrastructure we sold. Had a publicly-owned Telstra built the NBN out of dividends, and the government raised $64bn in debt to invest in a Future Fund, the books would look exactly the same as they do today. You've been dazzled by accounting tricks - following a magician's misdirection, and calling it "magic". 4. "negating the trillion plus debts... to some degree" is bullshit... It was created to cover DECADES worth of unpaid public service and military retirement benefits. Those debts amount to $322 billion, to be paid out of (currently) $269 billion in funds - leaving a $53 billion dollar black hole. Had the money been paid to super in a timely fashion (rather than the Future Fund being set up to cover unpaid pension debts), that $322 billion in benefits would be sitting in private super accounts right now. Again, you're dazzled by an accountant's magic tricks. Not free money - not "negating debts" - just a big government-owned super fund. "Can we all agree it was amazing when the magician sawed that woman in half! He should be a surgeon!"

• 
  Ben Davison (@Ben_Davison1) reported 27 minutes ago

  CBA makes $620 PROFIT PER CUSTOMER Westpac makes $532 per customer NAB makes $835! (Milking small businesses pays off) By comparison Telstra makes $104 profit per customer & super retail group (Rebel, Supercheap Auto etc) makes $20 per customer No wonder banks love oligarchy