AOL outages and service status in Seaham, England

Problems in the last 24 hours in Seaham, England

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

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

• 
  StuT (@tenchylad) reported 18 minutes ago from Sunderland, England

  Awful and that isn't a criticism of the kids , but more of the structure that currently exists. Not the infrastructure, as the AOL speaks for itself, but the coaching and recruitment model in places , needs a total root-and-branch reform of the way the Academy is managed. #SAFC

• 
  brett askew (@slimfarmer) reported 37 minutes ago from Lamesley, England

  @clivechilcott @ProagriLtd @AOL @nusuk surly this would be deal for you to promote, good work ethics,outside,good rates of pay plenty of students locked down twiddling there thumbs till September

• 
  Aaron (@charlton_comedy) reported 51 minutes ago from Sunderland, England

  ******* Shit @SunderlandAFC what is going on with the AOL

AOL Issues Reports

Latest outage, problems and issue reports in social media:

• 
  Paul Moore (@ftlpaul8) reported 2 minutes ago

  @AOL : WARNING - If forced to upgrade to paid subscription to “reset” password, you will not be able to return to “free” plan, even if you block future charges on your credit card. They charge you anyway. Call them: you hold for an hour. Then they say they’ll fix it, but don’t!

• 
  DEMediaIsPropaganda -TXIconoclast Apostle (@WhoIsVendix) reported 3 minutes ago

  @dom_lucre Smart People Never Trust Media CNN Worthless since apx 2000 When Bannon Brokered Sale. Maybe better under Time Warmer but CEO gone soon after insane AOL buy I schooled older but very green Bannon on need 4 Conserv media at HBS along w Defense Free Riding & China Threat

• 
  Rakesh Agrawal (@RakeshSFNYC) reported 3 minutes ago

  Mapquest holding line on Lake Ontario. I agree, but no doubt it is just a marketing stunt to remind us they exist. I was at AOL when Google Maps launched. The head of Mapquest would send out emails every time they launched a feature saying people would never use Google.

• 
  Big Sean Corduroy Don Jr (@universalken88) reported 4 minutes ago

  @whiteboysumer you want me to be upset? online? like interacting with a complete stranger that doesn’t know me or anything about me…could upset me? im 38 yrs old. i cant be upset by strangers online. i was in AOL chat rooms when this **** was fun. what ethics?

• 
  Olivier Groot (@OlivierGroot) reported 11 minutes ago

  @theamelia___ 18 but only as there was no AOL in NL and a waterbed is something I never understood

• 
  Miss EsqHire (@MissEsqHire) reported 17 minutes ago

  Claude v Harvey: My candidate at a small, no-name firm is about to turn down an offer from an international law firm because they use Harvey and his current firm uses Claude. Apparently he cannot live without Claude. Can someone explain this to me like I’m my mom in the ’90s discovering AOL?

• 
  steve brei (@stevebrei) reported 19 minutes ago

  @Salvo8284 @AYTOarchive Same here AOL just never could figure out how to adjust with the market and rebrand away from being viewed as an internet access company once local broadband started being rolled out nationwide by other companies and municipalities.

• 
  Billszmafia (@Babobooey) reported 25 minutes ago

  @fekdaoui @bot mine barely made it past set up before shutting me down for 7 days. "Bot credits" according to Grok. Grok Bot is is still in AOL dialup stage. Needs work and some tweaks badly. Save you money

• 
  Jesse (@jesse_altman) reported 27 minutes ago

  If you ever find yourself scrolling X and feeling like there’s too much happening and you’re falling behind on __________ thing, zoom out and realize by even being here and a part of the conversation you’re already light years ahead of 99% of the population w/ respect to the AI renaissance we’re currently living through. We’re still so early. It’s like the days when AOL used to mail you a CD ROM to onboard you onto dial up internet - we’re there. Spending the weekend with old friends in Austin, none of whom are in tech/SaaS or marketing. They’re doctors, actors/producers, teachers, civil engineers, carpenters, etc…and most of what we talk about on this app is totally alien to them. Which is totally fine. I’m hanging with the $20/mo Claude plan crowd. Their X feed is completely different. While I get a crazy amount of knowledge from this site it comes with decent bit of anxiety as well. There’s a shitload of noise to find the actual signal. That’s the apparent trade off — a sense of impending doom and feeling like if I don’t immediately test this platform/load this skill/build this workflow/try this model, etc…in exchange for what a never ending stream of knowledge from some genuinely brilliant people.

• 
  Daniil (@DaniilBuilds) reported 28 minutes ago

  AOL and Time Warner didn’t just pay for what the two companies were worth in January 2000. They paid for what they believed the two companies could become together. The announced merger was valued at roughly $350B, with AOL shareholders expected to own about 55% of the combined company. The logic was easy to understand: combine AOL’s internet business with Time Warner’s media assets and create value neither could generate alone. But there was a financial problem hiding inside that logic. Future synergies are uncertain. The merger closed in January 2001. SEC disclosures later put the acquisition cost at approximately $147B. Then came the accounting reckoning. In 2002, the combined company reported a $98.7B net loss, including a $54.2B goodwill impairment. That $54.2B was non-cash. It did not mean the company suddenly paid out $54.2B in cash. It meant the value previously assigned to acquired goodwill could no longer be supported at the same level. That distinction matters. When you pay upfront for future synergies, you are effectively putting a price on value that still depends on execution. If the synergies arrive, the premium can make sense. If they don’t, shareholders can end up carrying the cost. The most expensive synergy is the one you pay for before you prove it exists.