AOL outages and service status in Grimsby, England

Problems in the last 24 hours in Grimsby, England

The chart below shows the number of AOL reports we have received in the last 24 hours from users in Grimsby, 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:

• 
  ColonelPopcorn🫡🇺🇸🍿 (@WickedAwake) reported 9 minutes ago

  They siphoned our pennies so easily. Not to mention the fact that the prices are so overinflated in so many products. Bleach went from .49 to $10. Rubber bands and envelopes are $7! And then they put a bunch of poisons in their products to kill us slowly and keep us dumb. Things have gone to **** since WE GOT MAIL from AOL. One of the first images we saw was **** with a horse. The world as I knew it Jumped The Shark that day. This evil has been getting bigger and better for a long time. And with the internet, they got faster. I pray to God that our Saviors and Military and Allies have this under control and that We truly are safe. God Bless us all 🙏

• 
  simone (@synthetican1mal) reported 9 minutes ago

  horrible map. five guys and aol are from nova not ******* hampton roads. two completely different worlds

• 
  SHAKSINGH (@shaksingh) reported 11 minutes ago

  I still remember how the entire anti-hindu gang had started abusing AOL over a non existent issue.

• 
  Minh Nguyệt🌙 (@mnguyetinvests) reported 12 minutes ago

  @_tinatruth Steve Bartlett explained financial bubbles in one minute. The AOL–Time Warner story is a powerful reminder that HIGH VALUATION IS NOT THE SAME AS REAL VALUE. It reminded me of something I wrote on August 17 on my post 👇 A GREAT ASSET doesn’t automatically make a GREAT INVESTMENT. Pay too much, and your returns can suffer. Allocate too much capital, and one mistake can damage your entire portfolio. That’s why I believe good investing isn’t just about choosing the right asset. It’s about paying the RIGHT PRICE and sizing your position wisely. The AOL–Time Warner story didn’t teach me that lesson. It reinforced it. If you haven’t read my August 17 post yet, I think it adds another perspective to this conversation. 👇

• 
  K (@K53651110) reported 12 minutes ago

  @Irina_exh 19…. I never did AOL

• 
  Virginia Ray (@VirginaRay57067) reported 12 minutes ago

  @thorMjolniro It turned out AOL never said that. MB checked it out. AND it turned out to be false. Because I do think she is stupid I believed it and did not check it with grok.

• 
  Roger Ledbetter (@rledbetterCPA) reported 12 minutes ago

  You want 90s purchasing power but aren’t ready for the trade offs - - Tupac and Biggie releasing albums - Metallica and grunge peaking - Jordan in his prime - AOL instant messenger and no cell phones - Blockbuster video rentals Okay damn nevermind

• 
  Daniil (@DaniilBuilds) reported 14 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.

• 
  Greywulf (@Greywulf4) reported 15 minutes ago

  @Irina_exh Never had AOL

• 
  matyas fulop (@MatyasFulop) reported 17 minutes ago

  @neetintel @CommunityNotes If Emergency Action Messages aren't used for emergencies what does the military use then? AOL Instant Messenger?