Want to know how much website downtime costs, and the impact it can have on your business?
Find out everything you need to know in our new uptime monitoring whitepaper 2021
US retailer Target faced issues with its online presence yesterday, Tuesday 24th September 2019, when its website experienced an outage. The downtime not only impacted Target’s sales website but also its mobile application as well as payment processing in-store.
Responding to CNBC the retailer told the news channel that “as the result of a payment processing issue, some Target guests were temporarily unable to make purchases at Target stores and at Target.com, [but that] within an hour, technology teams identified and began to remedy the issue to limit the impact on our guests. This was not a security-related issue. We apologize for the inconvenience and appreciate our guests’ patience.”
Target has experienced several issues with its systems this year. Earlier in June, its in-store registers were offline for two hours following an “internal technology issue”. After that incident Target’s shares listed on the New York Stock Exchange fell almost 2% with industry experts suggesting that the inability to take payments could have cost the company as much as USD $100m in lost sales.
With 7.3% of all Target’s US$ 76.4bn revenue originating online the retailer will want to ensure that as Black Friday and the holiday season approaches that its systems are robust and not going to experience similar issues at such an important time for sales. For Target not only will the downtime have hurt sales, but longer term it will also be concerned about the reputational fallout, with it being reported that around 1,100 tweets on social media about Target’s issues during yesterday’s outage.
See Also:
StatusCake Team
Share this
More from StatusCake
A Notification List Is Not a Team
3 min read In the previous post, we looked at how alert noise is rarely accidental. It’s usually the result of sensible decisions layered over time, until responsibility becomes diffuse and response slows. One of the most persistent assumptions behind this pattern is simple. If enough people are notified, someone will take responsibility. After more than fourteen years
James Barnes
February 11, 2026
Alert Noise Isn’t an Accident — It’s a Design Decision
3 min read In a previous post, The Incident Checklist: Reducing Cognitive Load When It Matters Most, we explored how incidents stop being purely technical problems and become human ones. These are moments where decision-making under pressure and cognitive load matter more than perfect root cause analysis. When systems don’t support people clearly in those moments, teams compensate.
James Barnes
February 4, 2026
The Incident Checklist: Reducing Cognitive Load When It Matters Most
4 min read In the previous post, we looked at what happens after detection; when incidents stop being purely technical problems and become human ones, with cognitive load as the real constraint. This post assumes that context. The question here is simpler and more practical. What actually helps teams think clearly and act well once things are already
James Barnes
January 28, 2026
When Things Go Wrong, Systems Should Help Humans — Not Fight Them
3 min read In the previous post, we explored how AI accelerates delivery and compresses the time between change and user impact. As velocity increases, knowing that something has gone wrong before users do becomes a critical capability. But detection is only the beginning. Once alerts fire and dashboards light up, humans still have to interpret what’s happening,
James Barnes
January 21, 2026
When AI Speeds Up Change, Knowing First Becomes the Constraint
5 min read In a recent post, I argued that AI doesn’t fix weak engineering processes; rather it amplifies them. Strong review practices, clear ownership, and solid fundamentals still matter just as much when code is AI-assisted as when it’s not. That post sparked a follow-up question in the comments that’s worth sitting with: With AI speeding things
James Barnes
January 14, 2026
Make Your Engineering Processes Resilient. Not Your Opinions About AI
4 min read Why strong reviews, accountability, and monitoring matter more in an AI-assisted world Artificial intelligence has become the latest fault line in software development. For some teams, it’s an obvious productivity multiplier. For others, it’s viewed with suspicion. A source of low-quality code, unreviewable pull requests, and latent production risk. One concern we hear frequently goes
James Barnes
January 8, 2026