Amazon Outage Map

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.

Amazon Issues Reports

Latest outage, problems and issue reports in social media:

• 
  Matt (@MattNDallasTX) reported 27 seconds ago

  @amznsellerhelp 5. I paid $1,500 to get an Amazon children's product certificate, but Amazon allowed the other sellers to quickly jump on my listing without also paying to for the product to be tested. 6. Other Amazon sellers will keep lowering the price, so your ROI is always going down

• 
  The Fallibilist (@_TheFallibilist) reported 1 minute ago

  Here's my take on Steve Eisman's take on SpaceXI's IPO: SECTION 1: THE SKELETON The core claims this thesis depends on Claim 1: Tesla is fundamentally a car company operating in a structurally unattractive industry — capital intensive, hyper-competitive, and undercut on cost by Chinese manufacturers. Role in thesis: Establishes that Tesla's problems are not temporary setbacks but permanent features of its business. Without this, the merger isn't necessarily value-destructive. Claim 2: Four consecutive years of declining earnings are evidence of structural, not cyclical, deterioration. Role in thesis: Provides the quantitative anchor for Claim 1. The earnings decline is presented as proof that the structural problems are already manifesting in financial results. Claim 3: Musk will use SpaceX IPO stock as currency to acquire Tesla and merge the companies into a single entity called "X." Role in thesis: This is the predictive core — the event the entire argument is built around. Without this, the rest is just commentary on Tesla's competitive position. Claim 4: SpaceX's $1.75 trillion IPO valuation depends on presenting a clean, high-growth narrative to public market investors. Role in thesis: Establishes why the timing is critical. If SpaceX's valuation doesn't require narrative purity, absorbing Tesla's complexity isn't necessarily damaging. Claim 5: Combining the two entities would force SpaceX shareholders to absorb Tesla's margin pressure, China exposure, and capital requirements — destroying value at the worst possible moment. Role in thesis: This is the punchline. It converts the prediction (Claim 3) into a negative outcome by combining Tesla's weakness (Claims 1–2) with SpaceX's vulnerability (Claim 4). Chain Strength: This is a serial chain with a dependent conclusion. Claims 1 and 2 feed into Claim 5. Claim 4 feeds into Claim 5. Claim 3 is the trigger for Claim 5. If any upstream claim breaks — if Tesla isn't just a car company, if the earnings decline is cyclical, if SpaceX's valuation can absorb complexity, or if Musk doesn't execute the merger — the conclusion weakens or collapses entirely. SECTION 2: THE FRAGILITY FLAGS Where this thesis is structurally strong and where it could break Claim 1: Tesla is fundamentally a car company in a structurally unattractive industry.Structural Assessment: 🟡 ModerateWhy: The three specific mechanisms cited — capital intensity, competitive intensity, and China's manufacturing cost advantage — are real and well-documented in the EV segment specifically. Chinese manufacturers do produce vehicles at lower cost, and this is driven by identifiable supply chain, labor, and industrial policy advantages. That part of the argument is specific and difficult to replace with alternative reasoning. However, the claim performs a critical framing move: it categorises Tesla as "a car company." Tesla's current market capitalisation of roughly $1.3 trillion reflects market pricing of autonomous driving, robotics, energy generation and storage ($12.8 billion in 2025 revenue, up 27%), and AI compute — none of which are addressed. The structural criticism applies to one business line but is extended to the entire entity.Alternative Explanations:Tesla's valuation is driven primarily by FSD, Optimus robotics, and energy — not EV manufacturing margins. The "car company" label may itself be the analytical error. Capital intensity in EVs creates barriers to entry that ultimately benefit scaled incumbents who survive the shakeout. China's cost advantage applies most strongly to the mass-market segment. Tesla's brand positioning and software differentiation may insulate it from pure cost competition. Claim 2: Four consecutive years of declining earnings prove structural decline.Structural Assessment: 🔴 FragileWhy: The evidence is factually grounded — Tesla's automotive revenue declined from $82.4 billion (2023) to $77.1 billion (2024) to $69.5 billion (2025). But the thesis presents correlation as causation without specifying the mechanism that makes this structural rather than cyclical. The word "structural" does enormous work here and is never defined or defended. Critically, the most recent data contradicts the trajectory: Q1 2026 shows 16% year-over-year revenue growth and a 50% increase in gross profit. Gross margin expanded nearly 500 basis points year-over-year to 21.1%. A thesis that depends on "four straight years of decline" while the most recent quarter shows acceleration in the opposite direction has a timing problem.Alternative Explanations:The earnings decline reflects deliberate price compression to gain market share while new revenue streams (energy, FSD) scale — a strategy Amazon executed for years. Heavy capital investment in next-generation products (Optimus, next-gen vehicle platform, Megapack) temporarily depresses current-period earnings. Cyclical auto industry downturn, not Tesla-specific structural weakness. Q1 2026 may signal the turn. Claim 3: Musk will use SpaceX IPO stock to acquire Tesla and merge both into "X."Structural Assessment: 🔴 FragileWhy: This is the central prediction and carries the least evidentiary support of any claim in the chain. Eisman states he "fully expects" this, but the source material provides no causal mechanism for why Musk would execute this, how he would overcome structural barriers, or when it would happen. The amended language in SpaceX's S-1 — noting the company "may issue a significant amount of equity in connection with future transactions" — is circumstantial. Standard IPO filings routinely include broad acquisition language for flexibility; it is not evidence of a specific plan. Prediction markets currently price a merger at 51–57% before mid-2027, which means the market itself treats this as roughly a coin flip. The thesis presents it as a near-certainty.Alternative Explanations:Musk could pursue the "X" vision through a holding company structure, shared services agreements, or operational partnerships without a full corporate merger. SpaceX's board has independent fiduciary duties to its shareholders. A merger that Eisman himself calls value-destructive would face board resistance, shareholder lawsuits, and regulatory scrutiny. Musk may not want to merge operationally. Running a combined aerospace/AI/automotive/energy company would create organisational complexity he has publicly criticised in other conglomerates. The S-1 acquisition language may refer to smaller, targeted acquisitions (AI companies, satellite firms) rather than a Tesla-scale deal. Claim 4: SpaceX's valuation depends on maintaining a clean, high-growth narrative.Structural Assessment: 🟡 ModerateWhy: There is a well-established dynamic where IPO valuations benefit from narrative clarity — simple stories command higher multiples. This is grounded in observable market behaviour, not speculation. However, the claim assumes markets would view a Tesla merger as narrative contamination. That is one interpretation but not the only one. Markets have assigned premium valuations to conglomerates when the combination story is compelling: Amazon across retail, cloud, media, and advertising; Alphabet across search, cloud, and autonomous vehicles. If the "X" narrative — combining orbital infrastructure, global connectivity, autonomous vehicles, robotics, and energy — resonates as a coherent platform story, the merger could enhance rather than damage the narrative.Alternative Explanations:The combined entity could be positioned as the ultimate vertically integrated technology platform, commanding a conglomerate premium rather than a discount. SpaceX's core fundamentals (Starlink at $11.3 billion in 2025 revenue with strong operating margins) may be robust enough to absorb Tesla's complexity without repricing. Retail investors — who are allocated 30% of the SpaceX offering — may respond positively to the "X" vision rather than negatively. Claim 5: Combining the entities would destroy value for SpaceX shareholders.Structural Assessment: 🟡 ModerateWhy: The internal logic is consistent: if Tesla's problems are structural and SpaceX's valuation requires narrative purity, then forcing SpaceX shareholders to absorb Tesla's baggage destroys value. As conditional reasoning, this is sound. But it is entirely dependent on Claims 1, 2, and 4 all being true simultaneously. If Tesla's non-EV businesses are valuable (weakening Claim 1), if the earnings decline is reversing (weakening Claim 2), or if markets welcome the combined story (weakening Claim 4), then the value-destruction conclusion collapses. This claim has no independent structural support — it inherits every fragility from the claims above it.Alternative Explanations:If the merger exchange ratio reflects Tesla's weaknesses (i.e., SpaceX shareholders absorb Tesla at a significant discount to Tesla's standalone market cap), the deal could be accretive. Synergies between SpaceX's orbital infrastructure and Tesla's AI, robotics, and energy capabilities could create value that neither company achieves independently. A merger might unlock operational efficiencies (shared AI compute, combined manufacturing scale) that reduce Tesla's cost disadvantage. A note on the framing. The source material opens with "The man who called the 2008 housing collapse just made a prediction that is hard to ignore (Save this)." This performs a structural function worth flagging. Eisman's 2008 call was a product of specific analytical work on specific financial instruments — collateralised debt obligations, subprime mortgage pools, and the credit default swaps that insured them. That expertise does not transfer to predictions about tech M&A. A structural engineer who correctly identified a bridge flaw does not become generally credible on aircraft design. The "(Save this)" parenthetical creates urgency that substitutes for evidence. Neither the authority appeal nor the urgency framing strengthens any of the five claims above. They are rhetorical packaging, not structural support. SECTION 3: THE BLIND SPOT SUMMARY If this thesis is wrong, this is the most likely reason why The most critical vulnerability is the thesis's definition of Tesla as "a car company." Every downstream claim — the structural unattractiveness, the declining earnings narrative, the value-destruction conclusion — is built on this categorisation. Tesla's $1.3 trillion market cap is not a bet on EV manufacturing margins. It prices autonomous driving, humanoid robotics, energy infrastructure, and AI compute. If Musk's strategic rationale for the merger is to combine SpaceX's orbital network and AI division with Tesla's autonomy stack, robotics programme, and energy business into a vertically integrated technology platform, then the entire "absorbing Tesla's problems" framing is evaluating the wrong asset. For Eisman's argument to hold, it is not enough that Tesla's EV business is under competitive pressure — it must also be true that Tesla's non-EV businesses are worth too little to justify the transaction. The thesis never examines this question, and that unexamined assumption is bearing the most weight.

• 
  Leandrix Garciae (@leandrixgarciae) reported 2 minutes ago

  File access issues on Fire TV Stick 4K Max (Android 11) - Request for native file picker Dear PPSSPP developers, I am writing to report a recurring issue regarding file and ROM access on the Fire TV Stick 4K Max (2nd Gen), which runs on Android 11. To give you some context, on my older 2021 Fire TV Stick 4K (which is not the Max version, running Android 9), emulators like Redream and Snes9x EX+ can read the USB drive perfectly fine. However, this has become a widespread and well-known issue among users: this file restriction is strictly due to the Android 11 update on the new Fire TV Stick 4K Max, a problem that now affects PPSSPP as well. I tried using several file managers specifically to see if the latest version of PPSSPP could bridge the gap and access the USB drive through them, but without success. The tested apps (latest versions from Amazon Appstore) were: - ES File Explorer File Manager - X-plore File Manager - AnExplorer (as recommended in your FAQ) Tested Emulators on the 4K Max (various versions, none successful with USB storage): - Redream - Snes9x EX+ - DraStic DS Emulator - ePSXe 2.0 (only accesses internal storage) Regarding PPSSPP specifically, V1.11.3 is the most recent version I found that can at least access internal storage, but it fails to recognize the USB drive entirely. I suspect this is because Android 11 on the 4K Max lacks the native "Files" system app that Android 9 had. The breakthrough solution: Despite these Android 11 restrictions, RetroArch v1.22.2 (from the Amazon Appstore) is somehow able to successfully access both internal storage and external USB drives on this exact device. Perhaps the PPSSPP team could look into how RetroArch achieves this and implement a similar native file picker/manager within the app. It is honestly a shame to be locked out of the standalone app because PPSSPP is by far the best way to play PSP games; running them via the PPSSPP core inside RetroArch just doesn't offer the same stability or graphical quality. Right now, I am stuck using an older version of PPSSPP on the internal memory, but since it has very limited space, having full access to the USB drive is absolutely essential. I truly hope you can look into this, as a native file management solution would be a total game-changer for Fire TV Stick 4K Max users who love your emulator. Best regards, Leandro @henrikrydgard @PPSSPP_emu

• 
  SafprodsPink (@SafprodsP) reported 3 minutes ago

  @TillyMcReese If you genuinely want to do a project like that, start looking into other platforms. YouTube will shut it down eventually. Shop the idea around to Roku channels for example. A friend of mine did a show on Amazon about his family. He is a tattoo artist.

• 
  Mark Baum (@MarkBaums) reported 4 minutes ago

  I just asked Claude Fable 5 (Max) to give me its top 10 high-risk, high-reward stock picks right now. Here’s what it gave me…👀 “10 high risk high reward names for the back half of 2026. Half of these trade on narrative, not numbers. Know which half you're buying.” 1. $APLD - third 15yr hyperscaler lease signed this morning. $5.2B contracted, $36B total backlog. Bull case is locked in revenue. Bear case is debt funded buildout and customer concentration. 2. $CELC - FDA decision July 17. Phase 3 PFS of 16.6 months vs 1.9 for control. Approval rerates it, rejection makes it a different company. True binary. 3. $XE - Amazon backed SMR name, April IPO. $43M quarterly revenue plus a fuel business, more traction than peers. Trades at hype multiples with lockup expiry ahead. 4. $OKLO - just bought its own manufacturer to control the deployment timeline. First reactor targeted late 2027. Zero revenue today. Pure execution bet. 5. $IONQ - first pure play quantum past $100M revenue. Also 100x sales after a 60% May run. Best house on a very expensive street. 6. $UEC - Burke Hollow now producing, two of three US assets online. Torque on the whole nuclear trade without picking a reactor winner. Still hostage to uranium prices. 7. $KTOS - record $2B backlog, 22% growth, down nearly half from January highs. The pullback helps. 85x forward earnings and heavy insider selling don't. 8. $LITE - up 10x in a year on AI optics. Revenue grew 90% last quarter and guidance beat. Now trades above the average analyst target. Momentum vs valuation, pick a religion. 9. $ACHR - down 23% YTD on certification delays while Joby pulls ahead. $1.8B cash buys runway. Either the laggard catches up or the market is telling you something. 10. $RGTI - 800x sales. The purest expression of quantum hype on the board. Asymmetric in both directions. Do your own work.

• 
  SCOTTY BEAM (@ScottyBeamIO) reported 8 minutes ago

  IF YOU SELL ON AMAZON AND DON'T HAVE AN AI AGENT MANAGING YOUR ADS, YOU ARE LEAVING MONEY ON THE TABLE EVERY SINGLE DAY This guy built a Claude AI agent that runs his entire Amazon ad operation 24/7. No agency. No manual reviews. No wasted budget. Every morning it: –> Pulls all campaign data automatically –> Analyzes every single search term –> Identifies exactly what's bleeding money –> Finds exactly what's converting –> Delivers the exact fix before he opens his laptop This morning it caught one keyword eating 16% of his entire budget with almost zero return. Found it in seconds. Told him exactly what to do. One year ago he knew nothing about Amazon ads. Wasted thousands figuring it out manually. Now Claude runs the whole thing. Amazon ad agencies charge $2,000-$5,000/month for this. Claude builds the agent for free and it works every single morning without being asked. The sellers still managing campaigns manually are losing money on keywords they don't even know exist. Bookmark this post. Full breakdown in the video below.

• 
  JayCap (@JayCap27) reported 9 minutes ago

  @FLCons The problem is Amazon never investigates. They just let people steal. They really don’t care until a police report is filed with proof.

• 
  Bogus Banks, Behemoth Bubbles and Baseball Betting (@bogusbanks) reported 13 minutes ago

  I THINK SCOTT BESSENT HAS BEEN NAKED SHORTING OIL AS A MATTER OF NATIONAL SECURITY The weekly draw from Cushing for the week ended June 5th was 1.1m barrels. That brings Cushing down from 22.44m barrels in the previous week to 21.34m barrels. The last five weekly draws out of Cushing were: -1.1m, -583K, -2.79m, -1.7m and -1.6m. That's an average of 1.55m barrels per week. The operational floor of Cushing is said to be 20m barrels. Yes, Cushing is just 1.34m barrels from hitting the operational floor. At the current draw rates, less than a week away. Why is Cushing important? Because that's where the WTI Futures contracts are physically delivered. This is what sets the price of oil for the entire world. The US has four SPR's but none of them can bail out Cushing. The SPR in West Hackberry is connected to Cushing by the Seaway Pipeline. It used to bring oil from West Hackberry to Cushing. Then, US production started ramping up and the pipeline was reconfigured in 2012 to move oil away from Cushing and down to West Hackberry. If the decision were made today, to reverse the pipeline, so it could pump from West Hackberry to Cushing, like it used to, it would require weeks to months. There are no pipelines capable of moving oil from any of the four SPR's to Cushing. In other words, there's no bail out here. I think Scott Bessent has been naked shorting oil as a matter of national security. I bet he doesn't understand the plumbing of the system. He probably thinks "tamping down" oil is as easy as tamping down silver. These guys are so removed from reality. Would it surprise you to learn that Mr Suit and Tie, Mr Wallstreet, didn't figure this out before he started naked shorting oil? I'd bet dollars to donuts he's never changed his own oil. To me, it sure looks like he didn't figure out the plumbing involved with WTI contracts, either. It's such a good ole boy system. I bet they don't have a single person at the DOE that actually knows what they're doing. Would it surprise you? So, why is the price of oil a matter of national security? Because oil is the economy. Every mile you drive, obviously. But everything you buy in Walmart, or have delivered by Amazon, is delivered using oil, either diesel or gasoline. Obviously jet fuel. I heard on a podcast that Jetblu never hedges their fuel. Rising oil prices could bankrupt them. As stores like Walmart start paying more to get their inventory delivered to their warehouses, those costs get passed onto consumers. Higher consumer prices. Oh but, wait!!! There's more... The instant thing that happens with the anticipation of higher consumer prices is higher bond yields. The bond bubble Think about it. If you are going to loan your money to the US Government for 4.67% but you anticipate that stuff you buy a year from now will cost you 10% more, why would you make the loan? If the market senses that consumer price inflation will be a result of higher oil prices, and they surely will, they'll demand higher yields. Higher yields will pop the everything bubble. The housing bubble Mortgage rates more or less mirror bond yields, only a few basis points higher. As bond yields go up, mortgage rates go up. And that causes potential home buyers to be unable to qualify for a mortgage. That $1,200 house payment at 6.75% is now $1,500 at a higher rate. Sorry, you only qualify for XXXX amount per month. If mortgage rates pop, the only solution is for the price of the house to come down. That's how the housing bubble pops as a result of true price discovery. The AirBNB bro's will panic. The stock market bubble Discounted cash flow models. Smart investors look at free cash flow on the stocks they own as a money machine. If the machine is anticipated to throw off 5% but bond yields have spiked to 5.5%, investors figure they will choose the risk-free return of a US Treasury Security. Stocks compete with bonds. As investors pull money out of stocks in search of a "safe haven" the selling pressure will cause a panic. Stocks are at record valuations on just about every metric. Plus, the stock market also has record levels of margin debt right now, too. People on leverage will become forced sellers. The crypto market I didn't write the rules, but like it or not, since 2020, crypto has been tied to the hip with Nasdaq. Michael Saylor's Strategy and Stretch disaster aside, a stock market panic is almost certain to bring Bitcoin down with it. And of course, the bond bubble The bond markets will force the US Government to pay higher rates to borrow money if they anticipate higher consumer price inflation, as I discussed earlier. The US Government is paying over 23% of tax revenue, as interest, on the money they borrowed. When we went through the last round of CPI inflation back in 2021 & 2022, interest costs were around 8% of tax revenue. Back then, the national debt was "just" $28.5 Trillion. Today, that number is $39.2 Trillion. The rate of growth for tax receipts is lower than the rate of growth growth for interest expense. This is the beginning of a debt spiral. Spiking oil prices would kick that into high gear. The US Government will have a lot to deal with if there's another round of CPI inflation. The popping of the everything bubble means all the pensions will need bail outs. Insurance companies too. Banks. Private credit. The US will have to borrow more to bail out all these failures. There will only be willing lending lenders at much higher rates. Even the guy who saves all his money in bonds will be wiped out. As bond yields spike, bond prices fall. All that wealth, just poof, goes away, real fast, with higher oil prices. Maybe I'm wrong, but how can the market not see this coming? We are days away from a default and oil prices are falling. I follow Josh Young, Chris Martenson, Jeff Currie, Art Berman and Rory Johnston, all highly respected oil and energy experts and all of them are blown away that we aren't at $150 already. So, what am I missing about Cushing? There's no bailout that I see. The only thing I can figure, is, as a gold and silver investor, I've seen the Tamp Downs over the years. I've always known, deep in my gut, it was the US Government doing those tamp downs. Now I see oil going nowhere during the biggest energy crisis the world has ever seen. I suspect it's the government, again. Cushing should be at the operational minimum any day now. We'll see what happens...

• 
  Sri's Cricket (@CricketFantasyS) reported 13 minutes ago

  @AmazonHelp check your DM Repeatedly facing the delivery issue, Couldn't able to reach the customer agent through APP, I hope I get the solution today

• 
  Chris Hawkins (@upgradeoptimism) reported 14 minutes ago

  @AmazonHelp any way you turn off Alexa shopping? It activates with no rhyme or reason, is slow, is not helpful. It’s seems to just add an ai generated blob of meaningless text at the top?

• 
  Michael Roston (@michaelroston) reported 15 minutes ago

  Bought something on Amazon and it arrived in an unnecessarily large Walmart box. Have I discovered a glitch in the retail logistics matrix?

• 
  Chris Koerner (@mhp_guy) reported 19 minutes ago

  This guy bought a $300 inflatable movie screen on Amazon as a Christmas gift for his family and turned it into a $100,000 a year business at 80% profit margins. He just booked a $10,000 week. His startup cost was literally that Amazon gift. This is backyard movie theater rentals. But here's where it gets really freaking cool. Derek realized movies can't start until 9:30 PM in Texas summers because it doesn't get dark until then. That doesn't work for seven year olds. So he built the world's first indoor air conditioned inflatable movie theater. Full carpeting. LED lights. Four window AC units he bought off Facebook Marketplace for $150 each. He charges $1700 for it. His outdoor packages start at $375 and scale up from there to $1500. Then he added LED dance floors because kids kept dancing after the movies ended. Those rent for $3,000 and he'll have it paid off in eight rentals. In this episode Derek: - Breaks down how he went from unprepared at his first HOA event to a $10K booking week - Shares how he sources equipment from Alibaba and Facebook Marketplace - Tells me why his best clients are people sitting on a few acres who don't blink at price - Gives me the exact package structure he uses, from $375 starter to $1,700 indoor This one is awesome. Check it out.

• 
  Angel X (@AngelX709) reported 23 minutes ago

  @nero_software Ticket 277609 - still unresolved since December 2024. I have sent Amazon proof of purchase + the activation code multiple times (inc chasing again in April 26). Instead of giving me the full editing suite I paid for, support keeps gave the demo version & pushing me to buy the suite again. This looks like a deliberate sales tactic/con via resellers. Please activate the full licence on email acct given immediately or issue a full refund. The UK Consumer Rights Act applies.

• 
  Neffoc (@neffoc21405) reported 25 minutes ago

  @shkeela1278 Yup. Not a problem. People suck and Amazon/whole foods delivers.

• 
  Bogus Banks, Behemoth Bubbles and Baseball Betting (@bogusbanks) reported 31 minutes ago

  I THINK SCOTT BESSENT HAS BEEN NAKED SHORTING OIL AS A MATTER OF NATIONAL SECURITY The weekly draw from Cushing for the week ended June 5th was 1.1m barrels. That brings Cushing down from 22.44m barrels in the previous week to 21.34m barrels. The last five weekly draws out of Cushing were: -1.1m, -583K, -2.79m, -1.7m and -1.6m. That's an average of 1.55m barrels per week. The operational floor of Cushing is said to be 20m barrels. Yes, Cushing is just 1.34m barrels from hitting the operational floor. At the current draw rates, less than a week away. Every available barrel that can be diverted away from WTI-Cushing to WTI-Houston is being diverted. Why is Cushing important? Because that's where the WTI Futures contracts are physically delivered. This is what sets the price of oil for the entire world. The US has four SPR's but none of them can bail out Cushing. The SPR in West Hackberry is connected to Cushing by the Seaway Pipeline. It used to bring oil from West Hackberry to Cushing. Then, US production started ramping up and the pipeline was reconfigured in 2012 to move oil away from Cushing and down to West Hackberry. If the decision were made today, to reverse the pipeline, so it could pump from West Hackberry to Cushing, like it used to, it would require weeks to months. There are no pipelines capable of moving oil from any of the four SPR's to Cushing. In other words, there's no bail out here. I think Scott Bessent has been naked shorting oil as a matter of national security. I bet he doesn't understand the plumbing of the system. He probably thinks "tamping down" oil is as easy as tamping down silver. These guys are so removed from reality. Would it surprise you to learn that Mr Suit and Tie, Mr Wallstreet, didn't figure this out before he started naked shorting oil? I'd bet dollars to donuts he's never changed his own oil. To me, it sure looks like he didn't figure out the plumbing involved with WTI contracts, either. It's such a good ole boy system. I bet they don't have a single person at the DOE that actually knows what they're doing. Would it surprise you? So, why is the price of oil a matter of national security? Because oil is the economy. Every mile you drive, obviously. But everything you buy in Walmart, or have delivered by Amazon, is delivered using oil, either diesel or gasoline. Obviously jet fuel. I heard on a podcast that Jetblu never hedges their fuel. Rising oil prices could bankrupt them. As stores like Walmart start paying more to get their inventory delivered to their warehouses, those costs get passed onto consumers. Higher consumer prices. Oh but, wait!!! There's more... The instant thing that happens with the anticipation of higher consumer prices is higher bond yields. The bond bubble Think about it. If you are going to loan your money to the US Government for 4.67% but you anticipate that stuff you buy a year from now will cost you 10% more, why would you make the loan? If the market senses that consumer price inflation will be a result of higher oil prices, and they surely will, they'll demand higher yields. Higher yields will pop the everything bubble. The housing bubble Mortgage rates more or less mirror bond yields, only a few basis points higher. As bond yields go up, mortgage rates go up. And that causes potential home buyers to be unable to qualify for a mortgage. That $1,200 house payment at 6.75% is now $1,500 at a higher rate. Sorry, you only qualify for XXXX amount per month. If mortgage rates pop, the only solution is for the price of the house to come down. That's how the housing bubble pops as a result of true price discovery. The AirBNB bro's will panic. The stock market bubble Discounted cash flow models. Smart investors look at free cash flow on the stocks they own as a money machine. If the machine is anticipated to throw off 5% but bond yields have spiked to 5.5%, investors figure they will choose the risk-free return of a US Treasury Security. Stocks compete with bonds. As investors pull money out of stocks in search of a "safe haven" the selling pressure will cause a panic. Stocks are at record valuations on just about every metric. Plus, the stock market also has record levels of margin debt right now, too. People on leverage will become forced sellers. The crypto market I didn't write the rules, but like it or not, since 2020, crypto has been tied to the hip with Nasdaq. Michael Saylor's Strategy and Stretch disaster aside, a stock market panic is almost certain to bring Bitcoin down with it. And of course, the bond bubble The bond markets will force the US Government to pay higher rates to borrow money if they anticipate higher consumer price inflation, as I discussed earlier. The US Government is paying over 23% of tax revenue, as interest, on the money they borrowed. When we went through the last round of CPI inflation back in 2021 & 2022, interest costs were around 8% of tax revenue. Back then, the national debt was "just" $28.5 Trillion. Today, that number is $39.2 Trillion. The rate of growth for tax receipts is lower than the rate of growth growth for interest expense. This is the beginning of a debt spiral. Spiking oil prices would kick that into high gear. The US Government will have a lot to deal with if there's another round of CPI inflation. The popping of the everything bubble means all the pensions will need bail outs. Insurance companies too. Banks. Private credit. The US will have to borrow more to bail out all these failures. There will only be willing lending lenders at much higher rates. Even the guy who saves all his money in bonds will be wiped out. As bond yields spike, bond prices fall. All that wealth, just poof, goes away, real fast, with higher oil prices. Maybe I'm wrong, but how can the market not see this coming? We are days away from a default and oil prices are falling. I follow Josh Young, Chris Martenson, Jeff Currie, Art Berman and Rory Johnston, all highly respected oil and energy experts and all of them are blown away that we aren't at $150 already. So, what am I missing about Cushing? There's no bailout that I see. The only thing I can figure, is, as a gold and silver investor, I've seen the Tamp Downs over the years. I've always known, deep in my gut, it was the US Government doing those tamp downs. Now I see oil going nowhere during the biggest energy crisis the world has ever seen. I suspect it's the government, again. Cushing should be at the operational minimum any day now. We'll see what happens...