AOL outages and service status in Stowmarket, England

Problems in the last 24 hours in Stowmarket, England

The chart below shows the number of AOL reports we have received in the last 24 hours from users in Stowmarket, England 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.

AOL Issues Reports

Latest outage, problems and issue reports in social media:

• 
  Jeff Opdyke (jeffo) (@DigitalRoamad) reported 6 minutes ago

  All the SpaceX/Elon fanboys are upset that I said SpaceX is a wildly overvalued IPO and that at some point the share price will crater... and that is when you buy. But I hear all kinds of jibber-jabber about what SpaceX does and is and whatever. It's all the same words, just in a different order that defined the last 30 years of tech investing... and I've been around for all of it as a financial writer. So, here's a list of every IPO that was the biggest/most relevant of its time and what came of it: Netscape (1995): The company that lit the dot-com fuse. briefly dominated the internet browser market before Microsoft crushed it by giving away a competing product for free. limped into AOL's arms at a fraction of its peak value. Yahoo (1996): A $13 IPO that became a $110 billion fever dream at the peak of the bubble, then collapsed 93% to $8, spent a decade mismanaging itself into irrelevance, turned down a $44/share Microsoft buyout offer when it was already dying, and was finally sold to Verizon for parts in 2017. Amazon (1997): Went public at $18, rode the bubble to $113, crashed 94% to $6, then methodically became the most dominant retail and cloud computing empire in history. theglobe dot com (1998): Exploded 600% on its first trading day on pure mania with no real business model, and was bankrupt and forgotten within three years. VA Linux (1999): Holds the all-time record for the largest single-day IPO pop — up 700% — on just $17.8 million in annual revenue, and spent the next 15 years slowly selling itself off for scraps at a 90%+ discount to its opening-day price. Google (2004): The rare IPO that was actually priced like a real business, debuted into post-bubble investor skepticism, and rewarded anyone who held it with a 7,500%+ return over 20 years. Facebook/Meta (2012): Priced at $104 billion with a broken mobile strategy, immediately cratered 54% in under four months to $17 as investors fled, then finally cracked the mobile monetization code and turned a humiliating IPO into a 1,300%+ return for anyone who didn't panic. Snap (2017): Sold non-voting shares in a money-losing company with decelerating growth at 25x revenue, popped on day one, collapsed 75% within two years, and now nearly a decade later an IPO investor has still lost more than half their money. Uber (2019): Private market fantasies priced this one at $120 billion, the public market immediately said "no" and sent it below its $45 IPO price on day one, the stock bled another 25% in four months, and it took years of grinding toward actual profitability before the stock finally vindicated long-suffering holders. Alibaba (2014): Legit one of the greatest businesses in the world at IPO, rode to $300, then the Chinese government decided Jack Ma needed to be humbled, and a decade after its record-breaking debut the stock still trades below its first-day opening price. I am NOT saying that SpaceX is a bad company. I am saying SpaceX IPO is stupidly valued by an excessively greedy Wall Street trying to extract as much wealth as possible in this latest tech hype period. SpaceX will go on to great things one day ... but at 90x sales, the shares are destined for a deep, deep enema-like cleansing at some point. Extremely rich valuations never last. The history above tells you the trajectory.

• 
  Darrell Conwell (@DarrellConwell) reported 7 minutes ago

  @BeaconTerraOne @huskyXBT And if you put $1000 in AOL, you'd be **** out of luck. There have been many more AOL's than Apples.

• 
  Ken 無 (non-official taco bell affiliate) (@Ken67547214) reported 7 minutes ago

  @NotPerrysBoobs @ElmWho I spent many hours trying to get it to work with the free aol cd's, but I never did. I think you might have needed to pay an additional fee or something.

• 
  ReOpenPa (@reopenpa) reported 11 minutes ago

  @dr_bouchard @mediainfluence9 @JuddLegum AI isn't a traditional bubble. AI is in its infancy - like looking at AOL and saying you'll never shop on the internet.

• 
  James Boyd (@MedicFL1) reported 11 minutes ago

  NETSCAPE was like AOL, Browser type systems - that all changed in 2000. Using your Phone line was fun - 20 minuet downloads for a Bitmap / Jpeg picture. No one today could "put up" with how slow things used to be. Websites were made with Wordpress and were limited to say the least.

• 
  Gundam Explained (@GundamExplained) reported 17 minutes ago

  @Shr00msy @HMBohemond This isn't exclusive to the Gundam fandom and has been a thing since BBSs and AOL. It's individual people with bad takes and those takes are just as annoying as posts claiming 'all gundam fans' are annoying. A bunch of bored people on the internet don't speak for everyone.

• 
  Brian Cohen (@inthepixels) reported 20 minutes ago

  The Greatest Corporate Losses in History: The 25 Worst Single-Year Losses Ever Recorded Financial history is often taught through famous failures such as Enron, Lehman Brothers, WorldCom, or Bear Stearns. Yet many of the largest corporate losses ever recorded were far larger than those household-name disasters. In several cases, a single year's loss exceeded $100 billion when adjusted for inflation. The list of the worst annual losses reveals a striking pattern: nearly all occurred during either the dot-com and telecom collapse of 2000–2002 or the Global Financial Crisis of 2008–2009. While some losses reflected genuine economic destruction, many were massive write-downs of acquisitions made during periods of speculative excess. Below are the 25 largest annual corporate losses ever recorded, ranked by inflation-adjusted value. The Top 25 Largest Annual Corporate Losses of All Time 1. **AOL Time Warner (2002)** — Lost $98.7 billion nominally, equivalent to approximately **$143.1 billion** today. The failed AOL-Time Warner merger remains the largest annual corporate loss ever recorded. 2. **AIG (2008)** — Lost $99.3 billion nominally, equivalent to approximately **$127.6 billion** today, driven by the mortgage and derivatives meltdown. 3. **JDS Uniphase (2001)** — Lost $56.1 billion nominally, equivalent to approximately **$104.4 billion** today after the telecom bubble collapsed. 4. **Fannie Mae (2009)** — Lost $74.4 billion nominally, equivalent to approximately **$93.7 billion** today. 5. **Fannie Mae (2008)** — Lost $59.8 billion nominally, equivalent to approximately **$64.2 billion** today. 6. **Freddie Mac (2008)** — Lost $50.8 billion nominally, equivalent to approximately **$54.5 billion** today. 7. **Qwest Communications (2002)** — Lost $35.9 billion nominally, equivalent to approximately **$44.8 billion** today. 8. **General Motors (2007)** — Lost $38.7 billion nominally, equivalent to approximately **$41.6 billion** today. 9. **Royal Bank of Scotland (2008)** — Lost $34.9 billion nominally, equivalent to approximately **$37.5 billion** today. 10. **General Motors (1992)** — Lost $23.5 billion nominally, equivalent to approximately **$37.4 billion** today. 11. **General Motors (2008)** — Lost $30.9 billion nominally, equivalent to approximately **$33.2 billion** today. 12. **Deutsche Telekom (2002)** — Lost €24.6 billion nominally (~$24 billion USD at the time), equivalent to over **$30.0 billion** today following massive 3G spectrum write-downs. 13. **Vivendi Universal (2002)** — Lost €23.3 billion nominally (~$23 billion USD at the time), equivalent to over **$30.0 billion** today after its debt-fueled acquisition spree unraveled. 14. **Citigroup (2008)** — Lost $27.7 billion nominally, equivalent to approximately **$29.7 billion** today. 15. **Vodafone Group (2006)** — Lost $25.8 billion nominally, equivalent to approximately **$29.2 billion** today. 16. **Freddie Mac (2009)** — Lost $25.7 billion nominally, equivalent to approximately **$26.9 billion** today. 17. **Vodafone Group (2002)** — Lost $19.3 billion nominally, equivalent to approximately **$24.4 billion** today. 18. **United Airlines (2005)** — Lost $21.2 billion nominally, equivalent to approximately **$24.3 billion** today. 19. **Nippon Telegraph and Telephone (NTT) (2002)** — Lost over ¥2 trillion nominally, equivalent to over **$21.0 billion** today as Japan's telecom bubble burst. 20. **Nakheel (2009)** — Lost $20.9 billion nominally, equivalent to approximately **$21.8 billion** today amid Dubai's property collapse. 21. **UBS (2008)** — Lost $18.7 billion nominally, equivalent to approximately **$20.1 billion** today, marking the largest annual loss in Swiss corporate history at the time. 22. **Credit Suisse (2008)** — Lost over $18.5 billion nominally, equivalent to over **$20.0 billion** today, hit heavily by toxic mortgage-backed securities.

• 
  Don Fotsch 🌵🇺🇸 (@fotsch1) reported 20 minutes ago

  @munster_gene 1) the kids stuff is great for Brand 2) it’s too complicated 3) designed by “experts” (w/ any kids?) 4) it won’t get used much How do we know all this? We learned it all with AOL Parental Controls; was a KEY reason parents chose AOL; kids were the ones who knew it best (shutting it off); overall, minimal usage. anyone with kids, smiles at #2 above, in particular — engr, father of six, decade at Apple, five at AOL p.s. We will never see any stats on Apple/iPhone “kid safety” usage, due to points above; they’ll just keep taking about how they work with “experts”, who ironically, often have few or no, children.

• 
  ℝ𝕀ℤℤ ℂ𝕆𝕄𝔼𝕋 (@Shr00msy) reported 25 minutes ago

  @manhattanmaker @cavannastan I bet yall roleplayed like you were on AOL chat. Saying **** like “ASL? Hehe”

• 
  Gareth Walker (@Revision_124c41) reported 25 minutes ago

  @ASSEENONAI @Grummz They'll likely end up spinning xbox off. Kind of been saying they should do that since 2015. Just wish I did it on here so I could point to that. Problem with doing it at this point is that it is more about saving face for Microsoft and not about saving Xbox. I do think they should go through with it though. Part of the problem was Satya Nadella, he's the one who pushed for over expensive acquisitions and game pass. A lot of people blame Phil Spencer, but I think he was just a victim of his bosses own incompetence. I don't know where Sara Bond fits in to all of this, but I kind of point to her being a Satya drone that was hand picked for Phil as Xbox was not recovering since the Don Matrick blunders that came before him. A lot of people blame phil for what honestly started with Don Matrick, x360 was already a weakening brand by the time that generation was over and Sony had basically closed the gap that was once a huge lead and huge reputation. Removing Satya and the rest of microsoft would force the company to stand on its own two feet and look at the industry realistically. Cut some of that tainted human resource and get back to making good games. Hard decisions will need to be made and Xbox will need to be profitable again before this can work. We may even see microsoft retool their hardware targets to be more like Nintendo's than Sony's going forward. Leaving Valve and Sony as the only competitors in the high end gaming market. Still forcing sony and valve to address the low end as the plateau is no longer too far out of reach. This would effectively put an end to game pass and many other stupid ideas microsoft has had over the last 25 years. Praise Xbox Live as much as you want, but paying for a walled garden should have died with AOL 35 years. Now we have this stupid situation where we are fighting companies in courts just to keep servers online, paying for a minimal tier for "premium" game servers many of which are peer to peer and not being funded by the subscription. That entire back end is just for user accounts, messages, and voice chat, not even get versions of technology that are fundamentally free at this point. PSN and Nintendo Online would have likely had been still free too day if Microsoft hadn't decided it was more important to have subscriptions. I think at this point Xbox is a stranger to microsoft. Remember when the Xbox brand was formed it was to take over the living room and keep sony from ceasing control. They ultimately lost that fight and many others. I'd say the fight for the living room now belongs to streaming boxes, not game consoles. The threat of the DVD drive no longer exists. There isn't a single Xbox/Microsoft streaming service for any media that I'm aware of on Fire TV, Apple TV, Roku, or name another device. There isn't even a microsoft smart tv. These days Microsoft's interests are AI and Cloud. It's anyone's guess if Windows is even still a priority to the company these days, let alone Office. So why does Microsoft even need a gaming division? Direct X was originally intended to get people on windows. Now it's being used on Linux through proton and some devs are starting to look at vulkan to help improve that compatibility. GPU drivers are getting better in the linux space. I think it's time microsoft stepped back from gaming. Keep working direct X. Maybe consider bringing their development tools to other platforms. I know they tried this once a long time ago and Sony and Nintendo told them to **** off, but things change. The entire development suite for both companies is buried in Visual Studio development these days. With support for things like CLANG and cross platform connections. MS thinks making it easier to port between PC and Xbox Helix is going to be some kind of huge win that'll get them exclusives from third parties, I just don't see it. 3rd Party devs have entire core tech departments just specializing in getting around the weakness in dev kits. At best indies may seek you out assuming Epic doesn't just laugh you out of the room as people continue to get their Engine.