Bitstamp 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.

Bitstamp Issues Reports

Latest outage, problems and issue reports in social media:

• 
  Alexander Pierce (@Kaique0819) reported 2 minutes ago

  Don’t Get Fooled by This Bounce — The Real Risk for BTC May Be Just Starting Don’t rush to call this green candle a reversal. Looking at the Bitstamp 4H chart, BTC is now trading around $77,300. Yes, it bounced from the $76K area, but the real problem is: It still has not reclaimed the key resistance zone. Previously, BTC dumped from above $82K and broke below: $80K $79K $78K That means the short-term structure has shifted from strong upside momentum into weak recovery mode. Right now, there is only one key zone to watch: $77.5K–$78K. If BTC can reclaim this area, the bounce may continue toward $78.8K–$79.5K. But if BTC fails here and gets rejected again, this move is likely just a technical bounce — or even a bull trap. The most dangerous signal is this: $78K used to be support. Now it has become resistance. That is one of the clearest signs of a weak structure. My view is direct: BTC is not in a safe reversal yet. It is bouncing inside a danger zone. There are only two scenarios from here: Reclaim $78K: The bounce can continue, with targets around $79K–$79.5K. Fail below $78K: The bounce may fail, and price could retest $76.5K–$76K. If $76K breaks again, the next stop could be $75K–$75.5K. So don’t get fooled by one green candle. The real signal is not that BTC bounced. The real signal is: Can it reclaim the key levels it just lost? My view is simple: $77.5K–$78K is the short-term life-or-death zone. Fail to reclaim it, and this bounce is a trap. Reclaim it, and BTC may finally start repairing the structure. Do you think BTC reclaims $78K first, or retests $76K? Follow me if you want my next breakdown on the confirmation signals above $78K. I’ll keep tracking this 4H chart. Not financial advice. This is only my personal opinion.

• 
  Louround 🥂 (@Louround_) reported 5 minutes ago

  Could Lighter overtake Hyperliquid if all the stars align? Let's say clarity act passes, Robinhood keeps Lighter as its perp engine, 28m users (Americans and EU++) start trading perps on crypto and stocks, what does $lit actually earn from that? After writing this article, debunking a few takes and getting quite deep into the situation, it's more complex than it seems. Best case I could build is $500m - 1b a year vs ~$90M today with assumptions of: - $10b/day volume × 365 = $3.65t/year × 0.5-1bp = $180 - 365M. - $25b/day × 365 = $9.1t/year × 0.5-1bp = $455 - 910m. Hence "$500m-1b best case" (everything is forecast and assumptions so very rough). So it indeed looks juicy, but let's get back to reality. Lighter doesn't charge retail anything, that's their model, they earn from premium accounts (the pros and MMs), around 1bp (DefiLlama fees ÷ volume), while Hyperliquid takes 2-3bps in fees on the same volume. Lighter is the club with free entry for the mass, but the bar makes its money from the VIP tables. Packed club, but the bill only rings on one table, ~1bp realized take vs 2-3bps for hyperliquid that charges everyone at the door. Second problem, and honestly the one that keeps me up on this trade, why would Robinhood let $1B a year walk out the door to another company? They already own Bitstamp, they already own a CFTC-licensed derivatives entity, spent a decade proving they'd rather internalize order flow economics than share them, PFOF is literally their invention, they have the distribution and users. The moment US perps get legal and the prize becomes real, the build vs buy question will be properly analyzed. Vlad advising Lighter and the Ventures stake are nice, but nice wont stop a broker from vertical integration when 9 to 10 figs are on the table. Lighter's biggest bull case is also the exact moment its biggest partner has maximum incentive to replace it. And before the .hl crew celebrate, clarity cuts both ways. Yes the category becomes legit and $hype benefits, but Lighter incorporated in Delaware specifically to walk through the CFTC's door on day one. Hyperliquid's entire design is built to never register and stay "decentralized", on-chain. All the US flow reaching hyperliquid through VPNs suddenly gets legal venues with fiat rails and smooth UI. Will people use it and switch platform? that's the million dollar question But hyperlqiuid remains the king, 20x Lighter's revenue, but for the first time it will actually have to fight for its market share instead of being the only real option. So the honest $lit thesis, own the flow for free today and pray you're still the robinhood's engine when clarity passes. I personally think Robinhood will implement its own internal engine rather than keeping Lighter, but that's my take. It's a patience trade with a betrayal risk attached, but could be one of the most asymmetric there is 🥂

• 
  Jaider Hurtado (@BasedJaider) reported 10 minutes ago

  Bitstamp added WLD and JTO this week. Both have been trading on-chain for over two years. A listing tells you a token cleared a compliance desk. It tells you nothing about when the price moved. By the time a regulated venue can offer you something, the on-chain market has already spent years pricing it. Same asset, different spot in the queue. One line buried in the same announcement: unavailable in New York. Access comes with a jurisdiction attached. Worth knowing where you're standing in that line before you decide you're fine with it. Mentioning a token isn't a recommendation. Most launches lose value. High risk. Source: Bitstamp by Robinhood announcement. Save this for the next listing someone calls early.

• 
  The Fonz (@cryptofonzie) reported 11 minutes ago

  @Bitstamp hi what’s the point i have phoned numerous times they say it is a known problem with Email confirmation. not going out and the technical team still haven’t got back to us, no communication at all

• 
  Natalie Harris (@NatalieHarr21) reported 12 minutes ago

  @Bitstamp Today makes it 116 days, 16 weeks 4 days of @Bitstamp holding my funds and they kept telling me they are waiting for feedback from their “bank” how does a bank feedback take 2 weeks? Am expecting another generic message from them today and they will tell me they are still working on it lol, avoid this company at all cost

• 
  Midnight Investor (@MidnightInvestr) reported 12 minutes ago

  Robinhood doesn't understand the crypto market. After they acquired Bitstamp, they are now forcing those account to migrate to Robinhood. What's the problem you say? A lot of whales reside on Bitstamp. Not a good move by Robinhood and crypto as a whole.

• 
  Fred Velez (@Fredvelezcrypto) reported 13 minutes ago

  I keep seeing posts comparing Robinhood to Coinbase and Base. The problem is they're often comparing completely different things. Robinhood's $102B valuation. Robinhood's 27.7M funded customers. Robinhood's stock trading volume. Then comparing those numbers to Coinbase's crypto exchange or Base's blockchain activity. That's not a like-for-like comparison. Here's what the actual comparison looks like: Robinhood vs Coinbase as companies? Robinhood wins. ~$102B market cap vs ~ $42B. Robinhood vs Coinbase as crypto exchanges? Coinbase wins. ~$202B quarterly crypto volume vs ~ $66B for Robinhood + Bitstamp. Robinhood Chain vs Base? Depends on what you're measuring. Robinhood has won attention. Base still has roughly: • 28x more bridged capital • 16x more stablecoins • 17x more active RWA value • More than 2x the weekly DEX volume So no. Base is not cooked. And Robinhood is not a joke. Both things can be true. But the bigger story isn't who wins today's Twitter argument. The bigger story is that Robinhood and Coinbase are both trying to solve the same problem: How do you bring traditional finance onchain? Robinhood is moving from brokerage into crypto. Coinbase is moving from crypto into full-service finance. If either succeeds, crypto doesn't just get new users. It gets access to an entirely new pool of capital. That's the story I'm watching.

• 
  Lorenzo Valente (@LorenzoARK) reported 13 minutes ago

  Why @HyperliquidX Should Acquire Gemini: The Regulated HIP-3/4 Deployer in the US Hyperliquid is engaging with the CFTC/SEC to enable U.S.-regulated companies to offer perpetual futures that trade and settle on its public blockchain. I think Hyperliquid should take that ambition one step further: Acquire a regulated U.S. platform like Gemini and turn it into the de facto regulated HIP-3 and HIP-4 venue in the U.S. Gemini went public in September 2025 at a $3.3B valuation. Today, it trades at roughly $450M, down more than 85% from its IPO valuation. The core business is clearly struggling. Gemini is too small to compete effectively with the major U.S. exchanges for spot or derivatives flow. It has no meaningful liquidity moat and limited crypto-native distribution. The company has already started diversifying toward its credit card and prediction markets businesses. More telling is that Gemini is in outright shrinking mode. It has wound down its UK, EU, and Australia operations, cut headcount roughly 40% from peak to about 402 employees, and guided to lower compensation and technology spend for the year. Assets on platform fell from $18.2B to $8.4B year over year and spot volume dropped 66%. This is a company retreating to its core and cutting burn. But what looks like a challenged standalone business could be a strategic asset at a fire-sale price. For roughly $450M, Hyperliquid could acquire Gemini's entire U.S. regulatory stack, which I think could be worth ~$200M on its own: - NYDFS Trust Charter: custody + New York exchange authority (2015) - DCM: Gemini Titan, CFTC-regulated derivatives venue (Dec. 2025) - DCO: Gemini Olympus, CFTC clearing license (Apr. 2026) - FCM: in progress, completing the CFTC derivatives stack - MTLs: money-transmitter licenses across nearly all U.S. states - Broker-dealer: rails for regulated equities For context, @krakenfx's parent paid up to $550M for Bitnomial, effectively acquiring a regulatory and derivatives infrastructure asset with little operating business attached. Gemini's entire market cap is now below that. Yes, Hyperliquid would inherit a business currently losing roughly $30–40M per quarter operationally. But it would also acquire a meaningful operating footprint: - 580K monthly transacting users (Q2'26) - 1.72M lifetime transacting users - $8.4B of assets on platform - $3.8B quarterly spot volume - $3.1B institutional / -= $0.7B retail - $45.5M quarterly revenue, or ~$180M annualized - 106K active card users - ~$485M quarterly card spend and ~$220M of receivables - A regulated prediction-markets business with 27K+ traders and 225M+ contracts since launch At a $450M valuation, that's roughly $290 per funded customer. For comparison, @Robinhoodapp paid roughly $400 per funded customer for Bitstamp, despite acquiring about half the revenue and no comparable U.S. federal license stack. Kraken paid roughly $790 per funded user for NinjaTrader. And Gemini's users already hold an average of roughly $14.5K of assets on platform. In other words, you could argue that the regulatory stack alone goes a long way toward underwriting the purchase price, while the users, assets, revenue, card business, and prediction markets come on top. The most interesting part is that Hyperliquid could potentially finance the acquisition without touching a single burned HYPE token. The community reserve holds roughly 389M HYPE. Spending ~7.9M HYPE at $70 would represent approximately $550M — just 2.0% of the reserve, under 1% of max supply, and roughly 3% of HYPE's ~$18.5B circulating market cap — enough to acquire Gemini outright at a ~20% premium to its current market cap. Hyperliquid could then redirect a portion of protocol buybacks toward rebuilding the reserve. At the current fee run rate, the reserve could potentially be replenished within 12–18 months. The strategic logic is bigger than simply buying an exchange. Hyperliquid would be buying the regulatory bridge between HIP-3/4 and the U.S. market. Gemini could become one of Hyperliquid's HIP-3 and HIP-4 markets, the regulated U.S. deployer, handling KYC, custody, fiat rails, brokerage, clearing, and compliance while the L1 provides the underlying market infrastructure, liquidity, and onchain settlement. Mechanically, this transaction is far simpler than most public-company M&A. Gemini's dual-class structure gives Class B shares ten votes each, and the Winklevoss twins hold all of them, roughly 94.7% of total voting power. It is a Nasdaq-designated controlled company. There is no proxy fight, no activist interloper, no drawn-out process. Board approval and a majority of voting power both run through two people. The entire negotiation is whether Cameron and Tyler want to convert a controlling stake in a declining exchange into a meaningful HYPE position and the distinction of bringing Hyperliquid onshore. On structure, the buyer wouldn't be the protocol or the foundation directly. NYDFS probabl wants a US entity with named officers, not an offshore foundation. The path is a Delaware HoldCo, funded by the Hyper Foundation but legally distinct, that acquires Gemini and keeps the regulated subsidiaries intact. The L1 stays a separate permissionless layer that never touches a US customer. Polymarket already ran this playbook. Offshore, non-KYC, with a CFTC settlement on its record, it bought QCEX (a licensed DCM/DCO) for $112M in July 2025, ring-fenced it as a US entity, and relaunched onshore in December. Hyperliquid starts from a better position: no enforcement history, US users geofenced, and active dialogue with both agencies. Hyperliquid generates substantial cash flow and sits on an enormous treasury. It should be much more aggressive about deploying both strategically. let's stop the buy back and burns and play offense.

• 
  Vadim (@vadim_web3) reported 13 minutes ago

  Look at this: Known CEX balances currently hold ~4.89 BILLION $POL - ~46% of the circulating supply. Meanwhile, low-IQ onchain detectives monitor 5M, 10M, 15M POL transfers to exchanges, draw red circles around them and scream “SELLING 🚨”. Unfollow and block these idiots. They’re not doing analysis. They’re farming content and your attention. A CEX transfer alone is an extremely weak signal of selling. Why? Because almost 5 BILLION POL-equivalent is already behind the CEX wall. Onchain detectives can see POL entering a CEX. They cannot see what happens to it after that. And no, this does NOT mean 5B POL is sitting on order books waiting to be dumped. CEX balances represent an entire financial industry: customer & institutional custody staking market makers liquidity exchange inventory team/company balances internal settlement and plenty of activity we simply cannot see From the wallets I can currently identify: 4.894B POL-equivalent on CEXs 1.710B POL staked 3.184B POL-equivalent outside staking So ~35% of identified CEX balances are demonstrably staked already. POL can move to a CEX without being sold. POL can also be sold without any new onchain transfer to a CEX - because billions of POL are already there. That’s the blind spot of “onchain detective” analysis: once assets enter centralized infrastructure, onchain data stops telling you what is actually happening economically inside it. Top identified CEX balances: Binance - 1.257B POL Coinbase - 1.192B Upbit - 983.9M Kraken - 202.2M Crypto com - 115.7M Bithumb - 110.6M OKX - 99.6M Bybit - 95.0M Bitpanda - 94.6M Bitstamp - 93.4M 38 CEXs tracked. ~4.89B POL-equivalent identified. Keep that scale in mind next time someone draws a red circle around a 10M POL transfer and tells you what it supposedly means.

• 
  Curi◎nic (@Curi0nic) reported 13 minutes ago

  Robinhood-owned @Bitstamp just listed cash-cat:native . A token built around @RobinhoodApp’s original working name is now trading on an exchange Robinhood owns. Not the main app listing everyone wants yet, but this is one hell of a step closer. The lore keeps getting stronger 🐈‍⬛

• 
  SalamAndr (@FX1000ren) reported 14 minutes ago

  @BitstampSupport 2/9 2017 I opened a Bitstamp account as an EU customer. My account was fully verified. It was a regular retail account with a relatively small balance.

• 
  ＣＯＣＯ Ｗ ❄️ (@phy_nhu) reported 21 minutes ago

  @Bitstamp this feels like a generic canned ad not a real support reply, especially with all the frozen accounts piling up on the thread lol

• 
  Grey (@guo_lin99725) reported 22 minutes ago

  Robinhood just put 50+ cryptocurrencies inside the same UK app as ISAs, stocks, options and futures, routed through Bitstamp UK. Zero trading fees is the billboard. Habit consolidation is the business. The dangerous part for incumbents is not a cheaper crypto tab. It is a customer opening one app for every financial impulse. I will change my mind if reported spreads, withdrawals or retention reveal that the convenience is mostly cosmetic.

• 
  CrypNews TV (@cryp_news) reported 23 minutes ago

  🟢 The MiCA transition deadline hit on July 1 — and these are the exchanges that made the cut. Coinbase (Luxembourg), Kraken (Ireland), OKX/Crypto.com/Gate (Malta), Bitstamp (Luxembourg), Bitvavo/Bybit EU/WhiteBIT EU, Trade Republic (Germany). ~230 CASP licenses issued across the EU so far. Full authorization = access to all 30 EEA countries under one passport. #MiCA #Crypto #EU

• 
  AbsChud (@abschud) reported 23 minutes ago

  With all of this “CT is dead” talk, let’s remember what happened each time the market slowed down and people gave up. Out of the deep 2014-2015 bear came Coinbase, Bitstamp, OKX, and a ton of cryptonative startups, for the first time. Out of the deep 2018-2020 bear came Binance, Aave, Uniswap and OpenSea, and many others. Out of the 2022 bear came Bybit, Solana, Jito, Raydium, Pendle, Pudgy Penguins, and many others. Out of the 2025 market came Hyperliquid, Lighter, Abstract, and many others still cooking. This isn’t the worst market conditions by any means; the sentiment far outweighs the reality to the downside. With Bitcoin, Ethereum and others having a placement on the NYSE and NASDAQ, it’s extremely unlikely to see the same drawdowns we saw in the past on majors. Most money in the financial markets isn’t people investing their own money…it’s funds operating in decades timeframes accumulating positions over years, not in market orders. It is true that the easy times to rotate are over for now. But the real builders have just begun. And the real capital rotation has just begun.