ESPN’s long-awaited DTC streaming service is coming later this year, and while Disney has been tight-lipped on official details, we may have just gotten our first real hint at what it could be called.
During a panel at the 2025 CTV Connect conference, Disney SVP of Ad Sales Wendell Scott repeatedly referred to the upcoming service as “ESPN All Access.” Now, this isn’t an official confirmation, but it’s definitely worth paying attention to. Up until now, ESPN execs have only used “Flagship” as the codename for the project. Hearing a different name in a public setting? That’s interesting.
CNBC’s Alex Sherman reports that Disney will formally reveal the official name in the next couple of months. Could ESPN All Access be it? Possibly.
But if ESPN is going with that name, they better make sure that everyone actually has access—which, as we just saw, isn’t always the case.
“All Access”… Unless You Wanted to Watch the Fight You Paid For
ESPN+ recently collapsed under the pressure of UFC 313, leaving furious customers unable to watch a pay-per-view they had spent $79.99 on. Payment failures, login issues, buffering—everything that could go wrong did. Even Dana White publicly blasted ESPN+ for the disaster.
To make amends, ESPN let all ESPN+ subscribers replay it for free, whether they bought the fight or not. However, they stopped short of offering refunds since the issues had been “resolved” before the main event.
If ESPN is about to launch a premium standalone streaming service, this is exactly the kind of thing that cannot happen. Consumers will be paying somewhere around $30 per month for All Access (or whatever it ends up being called), and they’re going to expect reliability. If ESPN can’t deliver on that promise, fans might start looking elsewhere—especially as Netflix and Amazon continue creeping into live sports.
Still More Questions Than Answers
So, what does ESPN All Access actually mean? If this is the final name, is it replacing ESPN+? Running alongside it? Bundled with something else? Right now, it’s unclear.
What’s clear is that ESPN is heading into a make-or-break moment with streaming, and they cannot afford a messy launch. Fans are already confused between ESPN’s linear networks, ESPN+, the ESPN app, and the various streaming bundles that include sports. If ESPN doesn’t communicate exactly what this new platform is, it risks losing both subscribers and trust.
And if All Access is the real name? Let’s just hope that next time, paying customers actually get access.
I’m sure all the kinks will get worked out.
The Streaming Wars is intentionally ad-free
We don’t run display ads. Not because we can’t, but because we don’t believe in them.
They interrupt the reading experience. They cheapen the work. And they burn advertisers’ money on impressions nobody actually wants.
So we chose a different model.
We say the things people in this industry are already thinking but don’t say out loud. We connect the dots beyond the headline and focus on explaining why things matter to the people working in this business.
If you believe industry coverage can exist without clutter and interruption, you can support it here → SUPPORT TSW.
Support is optional. But it directly funds research and continued coverage — and helps prove this model can work.
Support TSW →
