Season Tickets/Prices

I saw the annual reseat note but that was the first time I believe it was said/ written. I thought the reason behind the reseat was because of the seating changes at CA but I guess that what just a convenient excuse.
 
Ceewho said:
I saw the annual reseat note but that was the first time I believe it was said/ written. I thought the reason behind the reseat was because of the seating changes at CA but I guess that what just a convenient excuse.
Click to expand...
Both can be true at same time. Team had an amazing season and needs to capitalize. It would be delinquent not to.

Why are we reseating?
Prior to the 2025-26 season, Carnesecca Arena will undergo enhancements in the lower level that will change the layout and quantity of seats available. In addition, we also want to ensure that all season ticket holders receive seats that commensurate with their overall level of investment and support towards St. John’s Basketball.


I feel for all of you, as this is something I'd be irritated by if I still lived in area
 
RedStormNC said:
Both can be true at same time. Team had an amazing season and needs to capitalize. It would be delinquent not to.

Why are we reseating?
Prior to the 2025-26 season, Carnesecca Arena will undergo enhancements in the lower level that will change the layout and quantity of seats available. In addition, we also want to ensure that all season ticket holders receive seats that commensurate with their overall level of investment and support towards St. John’s Basketball.


I feel for all of you, as this is something I'd be irritated by if I still lived in area
Click to expand...

I agree it could be justified for both reasons but if it’s going to be an annual thing, then it was happening and apparently will continue to happen regardless of the CA renovations.

Maybe some will enjoy possibly changing seats every year or the less certainty but I will not.
 
IDRAFT said:
More than where we all end up this has been a consistent discussion point with many of us - we like our neighbors and don’t enjoy being separated.

It is what it is and will be a new negative aspect of the experience. I’m not arguing against a good team trumping all, and that SJU has to do what SJU has to do, but that doesn’t mean something isn’t being lost either.

Things change.
Click to expand...
Agree 100%. I'm probably most disappointed about the overall decline in civility by a growing number of attendees (I won't call them fans) at sporting events. They are people who don't care if their idea of a good time annoys everyone around them. Like guys who decide to stand all game when no one else is as if they are the force that moves the team.

For all of this, price increases and all, I'd rather see SJU vs UCONN than the Knicks vs anyone - even if price, seat location etc was equal.

Reseating is the only tool sju has to monetize success from ticketholders.
 
Ceewho said:
I agree it could be justified for both reasons but if it’s going to be an annual thing, then it was happening and apparently will continue to happen regardless of the CA renovations.

Maybe some will enjoy possibly changing seats every year or the less certainty but I will not.
Click to expand...
I understand why many feel like you. I don't mean this to minimize what is happening and how it frustrates, but I always looked at them as they are called.... "season" tickets. Would have no guarantee of same/better seats next year. Even with PSL's in other sports/arenas/teams, nothing is really ever guaranteed forever. If selling best seats to those who can pay the market price/donations etc, will help keep program afloat and competitive, I think its right and going to game few will be up in the rafters.
 
Last edited:
passitback said:
This is all fine and dandy when Rick is running the show and being bankrolled by Repole and company.

There are zero guarantees we will be as good when he leaves. Then what?
Click to expand...
If performance goes backward, demand will drop, prices may come down and those willing and able to still contribute to levels like the last two decades will get the best of many more best seat options.
 
IDRAFT said:
More than where we all end up this has been a consistent discussion point with many of us - we like our neighbors and don’t enjoy being separated.

It is what it is and will be a new negative aspect of the experience. I’m not arguing against a good team trumping all, and that SJU has to do what SJU has to do, but that doesn’t mean something isn’t being lost either.

Things change.
Click to expand...
Exactly - there are some great folks in my area, we have a community of our own, maybe not 114 level but it is still our crew. It seems like the reseating plan will make it difficult or impossible to coordinate staying with people you like if they do not have similar point totals. I guess we will see how it shakes out and there's always the possibility that you find some additional friends as a result of the move.
 
Ceewho said:
I agree it could be justified for both reasons but if it’s going to be an annual thing, then it was happening and apparently will continue to happen regardless of the CA renovations.

Maybe some will enjoy possibly changing seats every year or the less certainty but I will not.
Click to expand...
Suspect they put that in there for a few reasons. One is that the viability of points on an ongoing basis might be calculated to spur ongoing contributions. Another is as a "CYA" measure so if they want to do it in 3 years or 5 years they can say "well we told you it would be annual so how can you complain if we do it longer than that."

I am doubtful that they will actually do this on an annual basis but I guess we will see.
 
As a MSG only ticket holder (get to CA for a game here or there) from Jersey (now), I checked My Johnnies Account, ZERO points, despite a long history of (non-insignificant) donations. I just wrote an e mail and expect not to hear anything back, we'll see.
 
BrookJersey Redmen said:
As a MSG only ticket holder (get to CA for a game here or there) from Jersey (now), I checked My Johnnies Account, ZERO points, despite a long history of (non-insignificant) donations. I just wrote an e mail and expect not to hear anything back, we'll see.
Click to expand...
I believe it's been said on here that MSG only holders have essentially not been calculated yet, so zero is not the actual number They're taking care of the full account holders first, so they just don't know it yet.
 
Beasts of the East said:
Agree 100%. I'm probably most disappointed about the overall decline in civility by a growing number of attendees (I won't call them fans) at sporting events. They are people who don't care if their idea of a good time annoys everyone around them. Like guys who decide to stand all game when no one else is as if they are the force that moves the team.

For all of this, price increases and all, I'd rather see SJU vs UCONN than the Knicks vs anyone - even if price, seat location etc was equal.

Reseating is the only tool sju has to monetize success from ticketholders.
Click to expand...
One of two - there is also price increases, and we know that is coming too. Pretty savvy of them to lock up any donations associated with next
year’s tickets before announcing what the tickets will cost. I’m not sure the average STH is factoring that into the overall equation.

If they double the cost of a package to sit in 107, 108 etc. there will be people who made “donations” (and let’s be honest these are donations as much as NIL is really about Name, Image, and Likeness) to attempt to keep a location who find they have to move anyway. Or drop out of course.

Nothing illegal about what they are doing, other schools do it, still icky business to me. But as an ethical guy when I look around I know I’m a dying breed.

On this one always come back to it is what it is.
 
RedStormNC said:
If performance goes backward, demand will drop, prices may come down and those willing and able to still contribute to levels like the last two decades will get the best of many more best seat options.
Click to expand...

Just saying it has the potential to backfire, as this can be perceived as a slap in the face to the folks who've been loyal season ticket holders through thick and thin.

Some may not want to support at the levels they have in years past, because they may dislike the process.

We can agree to disagree.

But, hey, money talks...
 
I don't think this will backfire. It's easy to complain about the school being mom & pop, and then once they start not being mom & pop, its easier to complain more. The most important thing in all of this is the product on the floor. We've spent how many pages pontificating how to get students to go to the game? It was very simple: just win.

Kansas, UConn and other programs do annual reseating. It's new, but a necessary adjustment.

Post-Rick, all it means is the next guy will have more pressure to deliver. We won't get stuck with a terrible coach for six years like we were this century. Fine by me.

Al Davis Nfl GIF by Las Vegas Raiders
 
dk423 said:
I don't think this will backfire. It's easy to complain about the school being mom & pop, and then once they start not being mom & pop, its easier to complain more. The most important thing in all of this is the product on the floor. We've spent how many pages pontificating how to get students to go to the game? It was very simple: just win.

Kansas, UConn and other programs do annual reseating. It's new, but a necessary adjustment.

Post-Rick, all it means is the next guy will have more pressure to deliver. We won't get stuck with a terrible coach for six years like we were this century. Fine by me.

Al Davis Nfl GIF by Las Vegas Raiders
Click to expand...

We shall see what the end game is.

While some are content with the process. Others are not.

It's all a moot point as we will all be paying for seats regardless.
 
I see no evidence yet that SJU is not a mom and pop shop. Let’s see how well they execute this process. Asking people for money does not impress me, even beggars on the street know how to do it, many with serious mental illnesses.

Hopefully they can run this effectively, if so, then I will agree they have turned a corner. But as an example, it looks like no communication explaining to the many MSG only planholders how this will work for them has been sent. I see that as something that should have been done, a very basic common sense step.

Just one thing, but it’s still early.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top