Disney+ status: streaming issues and outage reports

Problems in the last 24 hours

The graph below depicts the number of Disney+ reports received over the last 24 hours by time of day. When the number of reports exceeds the baseline, represented by the red line, an outage is determined.

Most Reported Problems

The following are the most recent problems reported by Disney+ users through our website.

• Sign in (38%)
• Buffering (32%)
• Crashing (20%)
• Playback Issues (6%)
• Video Quality (3%)

Live Outage Map

The most recent Disney+ outage reports came from the following cities:

City	Problem Type	Report Time
Wandsworth	Sign in	2 hours ago
Rugby	Crashing	4 hours ago
Orpington	Sign in	5 hours ago
Berlin	Sign in	16 hours ago
Crest	Playback Issues	20 hours ago
Brussels	Sign in	20 hours ago

Full 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.

Disney+ Issues Reports

Latest outage, problems and issue reports in social media:

• 
  omarschraidt (@omarschraidt) reported 3 minutes ago

  Huge downfall season, Disney needs to fix this ASAP

• 
  Annabel Lee . ꕤ ｡˚ (@LaSirenaAnnabel) reported 5 minutes ago

  @Justanavrage @nickyforwalt The worst part is that they want Disney to make Originals and not so many sequels, but when they do, they hate on it. Like wtf.

• 
  Sirmugen (@sirmugen) reported 6 minutes ago

  @SMB_Attorney I use to love Reunion, then the traffic gets really bad on the I4. If they fix it soon then maybe. Don’t stay there for Disney if you hate traffic.

• 
  Michael (@HellcatPerez) reported 13 minutes ago

  @FearlessRiOT Disney would’ve been in some trouble if they had actually went through with that

• 
  nas🧸 (@beomgyubobabear) reported 16 minutes ago

  my bigger problem is why that m4gachi ******* everywhere when he's not even that good💀 disney shoving him and m!lo in our faces when none of us asked for them🤨

• 
  Suoyp (@suoypmain) reported 17 minutes ago

  @PhantomNarukami even if it goes well, the rate at which disney wants to output content will inevitibly lead to desensitization of disney content and collabs, to the point the game becomes dependent on them. once all is added or they run out of what can work, the game goes down with it

• 
  Volodymyr Pavlenko (@mindinpanic) reported 18 minutes ago

  @InternetH0F disney bought the whole thing and still couldn't make the math work

• 
  🧸 (@pkpilled) reported 19 minutes ago

  im so confusd why is my disney+ not working here in korea lmao

• 
  Savethemagic (@Savethedmagic) reported 24 minutes ago

  @Windyb1979 I think this is exactly the problem. Disney no longer seems to have a dominant creative voice with a coherent vision and the authority to enforce it. Instead, you have teams responding to whatever the current business priority or IP mandate happens to be. Then add the loss of institutional knowledge and a design culture that increasingly seems rooted in architecture, interiors, graphics, and placemaking rather than the very specialized art of spatial theme park design. If you work around design, you can see the difference immediately; it's obvious. A beautiful environment is not automatically a well designed theme park. Sightlines, reveals, transitions, scale, movement, pacing, visual hierarchy, all this stuff Walt and the early Imagineers learned by actually building Disneyland and correcting mistakes in real time. What worries me is that Disney now seems to be repeating mistakes it solved decades ago, because there’s no longer a strong enough creative hand saying: No. This doesn’t belong here. Fix it.

• 
  Raccoon's Junk Yard 🦝 (💵 COMMS. PAUSED 💵) (@RaccoonJunkYard) reported 25 minutes ago

  @mewganaa Glitch GOD y Disney ZZZ ahhhhh video

• 
  Tony D'Orazio (@TonyForLP) reported 29 minutes ago

  @itsemileeharper Disney seems to be especially guilty of this. They tried a similar approach to High School Musical and it didn't work. OK, that gave us Olivia Rodrigo, but still. But I also don't have problems with the last generation's icons holding on to pass the torch - Madonna handing it off to Sabrina Carpenter (and Britney before her, I guess), for example.

• 
  Yuri Nator (@BigYuriNator) reported 30 minutes ago

  She ain’t wrong. The ones that go to Disney as an adult are the ones that have daddy issues #thismorning

• 
  Midknight (@Midknightfreakz) reported 33 minutes ago

  Remove the black man #Demayo remove the legacy. White people don’t know what to do with storm that’s the problem. #Disney is about to **** up mark my words.

• 
  💜❤️ Bailee 💜❤️ | Hidden Heroes era (@xoxoShadowfan03) reported 38 minutes ago

  @godzillaboy_54 Its a remake and it's not originally owned by Disney and we all know with remakes it was gonna be terrible anyways.

• 
  Garix 👽👾 (@Just_Garix) reported 38 minutes ago

  @BlindEnt @bobbyh15 @BlazeBinges lol it was for “budget” issues. You think Disney doesn’t have the money for it? It’s clearly hasbro that was causing issues

• 
  zed (@zed_pal) reported 39 minutes ago

  @LeePheonix360 @jk_rowling Nope. Fair days pay for a fair day's work. Disney having purity tests for its young stars are all wonderful. They grow up and sometimes go wild and embarrassing. Its not new.

• 
  💥East_Coast_Bull💥 (@DanDacosta8) reported 40 minutes ago

  @hertribevibe You are dude and careful what bathroom you go into you might get no problems at Disney but come down my area you going to learn that you going to need to use your manly self

• 
  Ⓧ🅐ⓥ🅘-🅔ⓐ🅡 (@disneymagicguy) reported 43 minutes ago

  @PixieDustVibes @FlopsandParks I have expectations for Disney. It’s sad no new generation does. Making excuses doesn’t fix the problem. It’s a new thing with new management. So I keep posting negatives I find here. No one has to view them. I don’t even read my posts as I’m sure the spelling proves.

• 
  Kyoot | 🇲🇽 (@Kyootiji) reported 43 minutes ago

  @ToonHive Well at least SOMETHING is being work on for disney plus

• 
  ⁷|🇬🇦 (@loveolise) reported 44 minutes ago

  @beba_typical @PERC4BETHRRY Nepotism I heard his momma work at Disney or something

• 
  chloe 🐾🪽 (@prettyorlittle) reported 45 minutes ago

  @percabethfv the guy is supposed to fall in love with a new girl in every disney movie sometimes it just doesnt work

• 
  ToXin (@Spidey07271) reported 46 minutes ago

  It look like a 3d disney model... Please, do not take a change in the artstyle, it will bé the worst thing to do. His face doesn't have black lines anymore, it feels off. It doesn't feel like a comic book anymore

• 
  PokeNeru (@PokeNeru_) reported 47 minutes ago

  So they go forward with terrible live action movies but when then got a GOOD LIVE ACTION SERIES Disney go nah.

• 
  Andrew Frye (@itsandrewfrye) reported 47 minutes ago

  Me walking back into work at the Disney Store in Square One circa 2012

• 
  Savethemagic (@Savethedmagic) reported 48 minutes ago

  @trojanjustin It does look awful. It's a disgrace to everything Disney stood for.

• 
  Jamie Walters, CAIA (@JWalters314) reported 50 minutes ago

  @SMB_Attorney The 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act materially strengthened the tax incentive to buy properties like these giant Disney-area short-term rentals. The basic mechanism was that TCJA expanded bonus depreciation to 100% for qualifying property acquired and placed in service after September 27, 2017 and before 2023. It also changed the rules so that used property could qualify, not merely brand-new property. That was enormously important for real-estate investors because someone buying an existing vacation home could potentially obtain accelerated deductions on qualifying components of the property. Imagine a simplified version of the Kissimmee house $694,000 purchase price less, say, $100,000 allocated to land leaves $594,000 depreciable basis. Suppose a cost-segregation study classified $150,000–$200,000 of that basis into qualifying 5-, 7-, or 15-year property. During the 100% bonus-depreciation period, much or potentially all of those qualifying components could be deducted immediately rather than slowly over many years. That alone created a large tax deferral. But short-term rentals had an additional advantage that conventional landlords generally didn't have. Under the passive-activity rules, ordinary rental real estate is generally treated as passive. That matters because a $150,000 depreciation-generated loss usually cannot simply erase $150,000 of salary earned at someone's unrelated job. But IRS Publication 925 contains an important exception: an activity isn't treated as a "rental activity" for these passive-activity rules when the average period of customer use is seven days or less. Then comes the second requirement: material participation. If the owner materially participates, the activity can potentially produce a non-passive tax loss. That means a high-income household could, depending on its facts, use a large depreciation loss from an Airbnb against wages or business income rather than merely carrying the loss forward as a passive loss. Plenty of American's from the top 10% have inherited wealth and "business income," that was eager to take advantage of the 2017 tax law incentives. Economic return=Airbnb cash flow+property appreciation+tax savings/deferral. During 2020–22, an investor could plausibly model all three as positive at once. The tax code didn't require investors to finance the house entirely with equity. Someone might put down $140,000 on a $700,000 property while depreciation deductions were based largely on the property's depreciable basis, not merely on the buyer's cash down payment. TCJA also created a particularly powerful timing coincidence Look at the timeline: 2018–2022: 100% bonus depreciation. 2020–2021: extraordinarily low mortgage rates. 2020–2022: pandemic-era vacation-rental demand boom. 2020–2022: enormous housing appreciation. 2020–2022: investors increasingly marketed cost segregation + STR tax strategies. You therefore had fiscal policy, monetary policy and tourism-market expectations all pushing in essentially the same direction. The owner's actual economic experience doesn't equal simply a $204,000 loss. You would need to reconstruct: purchase price + closing/furnishing costs + operating losses + interest + insurance + HOA + taxes−rental income−tax benefits−principal reduction and then account for transaction costs and tax consequences upon sale. The story does not end with TCJA. After the original TCJA bonus-depreciation percentage began phasing down, Congress subsequently restored permanent 100% bonus depreciation for qualifying property acquired after January 19, 2025. So the accelerated-depreciation incentive itself is alive again. People will 1031 exchange. If the 2023 buyer operated this successfully as a high-rate Disney short-term rental for three years, collected positive net operating income, and used cost segregation plus bonus depreciation to shelter other business income, then a large portion of the apparent capital loss may already have been economically recovered. At a 37% marginal federal rate, a $160,000 usable first-year depreciation loss would have an immediate tax value of roughly: $160,000(0.37)=$59,200. Now add the operating business. Suppose this seven-bedroom Disney property produced, after Airbnb/Vrbo fees, management, utilities, HOA, insurance, property taxes, repairs and interest, an average $30,000 of actual cash profit per year for three years. That's another: 3($30,000)=$90,000. $90,000 of operating profit plus perhaps $70,000 of accumulated tax savings already puts the investor around $160,000 ahead of the simple purchase-price-to-sale-price comparison. So before transaction costs and disposition taxes, the economic loss might be closer to: −204,000+90,000+70,000=−$44,000​ rather than −$204,000. And if the Airbnb generated $50,000 annually rather than $30,000, you'd have: 3(50,000)=$150,000 of cumulative operating profit, and the investor could conceivably have made money over the entire holding period despite selling the house for $204,000 less than he paid. Suppose he put 20% down: $694,000(20%)=$138,800. He didn't have $694,000 of personal capital at risk. He may have controlled a $694,000 depreciable income-producing asset with roughly $139,000 of initial equity. Now suppose during ownership he got: $90k cash flow+$70k tax savings=$160k of cumulative economic benefits. That exceeds the original $139,000 down payment before considering financing costs already embedded in our assumed net cash flow. This is why the return on investor equity is a much better framework than Nick Gerli's purchase-price-versus-list-price graphic. There is, however, an important complication at sale. Accelerated depreciation isn't simply forgotten. Depreciation reduces tax basis, and sales of depreciable business property can trigger the rules applicable to Sections 1245 and 1250. IRS Publication 544 specifically addresses depreciation recognition/recapture upon disposition. But here's an especially interesting feature of this particular case: the property has fallen so far in price that the disposition analysis may be much less painful than it would be if the house had appreciated. If the buyer's adjusted tax basis has fallen substantially because of depreciation but the property is nevertheless being sold at $490,000, you have to allocate the sales proceeds among the land, building and cost-segregated components and calculate gain/loss asset by asset. You can't simply say “all $160,000 of depreciation gets recaptured.” The exact outcome depends on those allocations and adjusted bases. The investor may have only about 10% of the accelerated depreciation come back as §1245 ordinary-income recapture. For this particular $694k → $490k example, >80% of the accelerated depreciation escaping immediate recapture is not inherently implausible at all. What looks like a loss to regular W2 slaves may have been a nice gain to an investor with inherited business income to offset and an accountant who can work the books. An investor could rationally bid more for the house than an owner-occupant could justify, because the investor was purchasing not merely housing services but a bundle of: Disney STR income + leveraged appreciation + accelerated tax deductions. The tax code therefore helped capitalize some of those benefits into the acquisition price itself.

• 
  Zak🗣️💪🍼💜 (@ZakKondratenko) reported 51 minutes ago

  @CousinTurn @GMEPHRK and if we’re counting voice work he was obviously the best ever Disney villain

• 
  x24 (@christopherco) reported 53 minutes ago

  @InfoDisneyHulu Tbh I’m glad it didn’t work because what are the odds she would be able to take this time to tour. She really revitalized her brand without Disney taking her cash

• 
  ✨Starlight Mechanica✨ (@ArtsyMechSM) reported 55 minutes ago

  @BoredKyo @Protag_Man @makunijiiro That would be a terrible business choice. It would however still make it so Disney benefits from every single use of the engine.

• 
  Kent Beyers (@kingofcities) reported 56 minutes ago

  @PwrRngr I love in the article where it says they're not moving forward because superhero series are expensive to make. No ******* ****?? Everything Disney does is expensive, so much bloat. But somehow it was made for years by other people in New Zealand on a modest budget, no problem.