DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
Bad Manners and Brimstone
HTML https://badmanners.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Weddings
*****************************************************
#Post#: 50156--------------------------------------------------
Re: When the Bride and Groom can't afford to pay for Everyone's
Dinner
By: Hmmm Date: April 13, 2020, 10:28 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=OnyxBird link=topic=1670.msg50012#msg50012
date=1586471254]
[quote author=Hmmm link=topic=1670.msg50001#msg50001
date=1586461519]
[quote author=Jem link=topic=1670.msg49993#msg49993
date=1586456231]
[quote author=TootsNYC link=topic=1670.msg49973#msg49973
date=1586447373]
So--my point is:
If I were advising this couple, I would suggest that they think
whether there is anyone close to them that they could turn to
for help in offsetting the cost of this, either as their wedding
gift (or partial wedding gift) or as a long-term no-interest
loan.
[/quote]
This would really rub me the wrong way, especially for a
destination wedding. There is absolutely no reason why this
couple cannot have a wedding they can afford and provide some
hospitality to their guests. If they want to go to Vegas
afterword for a honeymoon, great, but there is no way I would
financially support this couple in the wedding they are
currently planning.
[/quote]
That was one of my first reactions but then I started thinking
that a wedding at Circus Circus could be way cheaper than the
cost of renting a chapel or arranging for a park to have a civil
ceremony. I took a look at the packages and they can have one
for $600 that includes 1 night hotel room, use of the chappel,
bouquet, a dvd of the ceremony & photographer & a few photos. If
they are within driving distance, I know that is way less
expensive anything you'd be able to do in my city. Here I doubt
you'd be able to get a photographer to come onsite for less than
$500 for the ceremony. The most expensive package they offered
was $1600. So let's say the couple were "splurging" for the $900
middle of the road package, the bride spends $300 on her dress
and they have another $500 in travel or other expenses. So they
are still under $2000 for the entire wedding cost. If they have
50 guests (OP said the chapel held 65 but expected less) and the
restaurant is $30 per guest then you add on the gratuity and
taxes, they are around $2000 for the dinner. They've now doubled
their budget.
But I do agree with Toots about checking with close family on
whether they'd be ok with picking up part of the reception cost
[/quote]
But why are any of those things (other that perhaps reserving a
space large enough to accommodate the attendees) needed to the
point that they would take precedence over providing any actual
hospitality to the people invited to the wedding?
Unless the couple are marrying in Vegas because it they are
traveling to the location where a majority of their guests live
(i.e., taking on the travel costs in order to save travel
costs/time for their guests), then a hotel room, professional
photographer, bouquet, new clothes, etc., are all for the
benefit of the couple, not their guests. To choose to incur
costs that indulge themselves and then claim they "can't afford"
to offer their guests the minimal hospitality of a simple meal
or even a slice of cake is the problem with the whole idea, even
if those self-indulgent costs would be on the frugal side
compared to many other peoples' weddings.
Plenty of people get married in someone's backyard, eliminating
venue rental fees. The marriage is still valid even if there are
no photographs at all, much less with no professional
videographer. There's nothing wrong with getting married in
ordinary clothes one already owns rather than special, new
"wedding" clothes. There is nothing rude about serving simple,
homemade cake from a box mix and lemonade made at home to save
on food costs (or just, in general, simple food bought at a
grocery store, rather than more expensive restaurant/catered
meals). There is, however, something very wrong about inviting
"guests" to come, at their own expense, to celebrate the couple
while the couple does nothing in terms of hospitality but does
spend money on themselves.
snip
[/quote]
I live in a upper middle class neighborhood and know very few
people who's back yard would accommodate 65 guests. You'd also
need a family member or close friend who's home has enough
bathrooms to accommodate 65 guests. People living in densely
populated areas may find those two items very challenging, let
alone finding parking.
But my original point of my post was that the concept of a Las
Vega wedding is not a lavish or extravagant option.
#Post#: 50206--------------------------------------------------
Re: When the Bride and Groom can't afford to pay for Everyone's
Dinner
By: Gellchom Date: April 13, 2020, 9:10 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=Hmmm link=topic=1670.msg50156#msg50156
date=1586791730]
[quote author=OnyxBird link=topic=1670.msg50012#msg50012
date=1586471254]
[quote author=Hmmm link=topic=1670.msg50001#msg50001
date=1586461519]
[quote author=Jem link=topic=1670.msg49993#msg49993
date=1586456231]
[quote author=TootsNYC link=topic=1670.msg49973#msg49973
date=1586447373]
So--my point is:
If I were advising this couple, I would suggest that they think
whether there is anyone close to them that they could turn to
for help in offsetting the cost of this, either as their wedding
gift (or partial wedding gift) or as a long-term no-interest
loan.
[/quote]
This would really rub me the wrong way, especially for a
destination wedding. There is absolutely no reason why this
couple cannot have a wedding they can afford and provide some
hospitality to their guests. If they want to go to Vegas
afterword for a honeymoon, great, but there is no way I would
financially support this couple in the wedding they are
currently planning.
[/quote]
That was one of my first reactions but then I started thinking
that a wedding at Circus Circus could be way cheaper than the
cost of renting a chapel or arranging for a park to have a civil
ceremony. I took a look at the packages and they can have one
for $600 that includes 1 night hotel room, use of the chappel,
bouquet, a dvd of the ceremony & photographer & a few photos. If
they are within driving distance, I know that is way less
expensive anything you'd be able to do in my city. Here I doubt
you'd be able to get a photographer to come onsite for less than
$500 for the ceremony. The most expensive package they offered
was $1600. So let's say the couple were "splurging" for the $900
middle of the road package, the bride spends $300 on her dress
and they have another $500 in travel or other expenses. So they
are still under $2000 for the entire wedding cost. If they have
50 guests (OP said the chapel held 65 but expected less) and the
restaurant is $30 per guest then you add on the gratuity and
taxes, they are around $2000 for the dinner. They've now doubled
their budget.
But I do agree with Toots about checking with close family on
whether they'd be ok with picking up part of the reception cost
[/quote]
But why are any of those things (other that perhaps reserving a
space large enough to accommodate the attendees) needed to the
point that they would take precedence over providing any actual
hospitality to the people invited to the wedding?
Unless the couple are marrying in Vegas because it they are
traveling to the location where a majority of their guests live
(i.e., taking on the travel costs in order to save travel
costs/time for their guests), then a hotel room, professional
photographer, bouquet, new clothes, etc., are all for the
benefit of the couple, not their guests. To choose to incur
costs that indulge themselves and then claim they "can't afford"
to offer their guests the minimal hospitality of a simple meal
or even a slice of cake is the problem with the whole idea, even
if those self-indulgent costs would be on the frugal side
compared to many other peoples' weddings.
Plenty of people get married in someone's backyard, eliminating
venue rental fees. The marriage is still valid even if there are
no photographs at all, much less with no professional
videographer. There's nothing wrong with getting married in
ordinary clothes one already owns rather than special, new
"wedding" clothes. There is nothing rude about serving simple,
homemade cake from a box mix and lemonade made at home to save
on food costs (or just, in general, simple food bought at a
grocery store, rather than more expensive restaurant/catered
meals). There is, however, something very wrong about inviting
"guests" to come, at their own expense, to celebrate the couple
while the couple does nothing in terms of hospitality but does
spend money on themselves.
snip
[/quote]
I live in a upper middle class neighborhood and know very few
people who's back yard would accommodate 65 guests. You'd also
need a family member or close friend who's home has enough
bathrooms to accommodate 65 guests. People living in densely
populated areas may find those two items very challenging, let
alone finding parking.
But my original point of my post was that the concept of a Las
Vega wedding is not a lavish or extravagant option.
[/quote]
You're right, Hmmm, it's not, and it sure would look a lot worse
if they were spending a fortune on themselves and nothing on
their guests.
But that just changes the scale, not the principle. It's still
just as OnyxBird said so well: what they are spending is still
"all for the benefit of the couple, not their guests. To choose
to incur costs that indulge themselves and then claim they
'can't afford' to offer their guests the minimal hospitality of
a simple meal or even a slice of cake is the problem with the
whole idea, even if those self-indulgent costs would be on the
frugal side compared to many other peoples' weddings."
A backyard was just an example of an inexpensive or free venue
-- substitute a park, clergy person's office, or City Hall.
I don't begrudge them a wedding gown or photographer or anything
else, including Las Vegas, if that's what they want. But I
agree that you can't spend on those things and then say you
can't afford minimal hospitality for your guests. So if they
MUST have those things, and that uses up all their budget, then
just don't invite all those people. If having those people at
their wedding is important to them, then they need to change
their plans. That's how it is for everyone, in fact.
This isn't the first couple to decide they are entitled to their
desired wedding even though they can't afford it. EVERYONE has
to make some compromises in their wedding plans, even people who
are spending a million. This couple is in no different
position, really. They have to decide what their budget is and
then decide how to spend it. To invite a lot of people but to
spend your whole budget on yourselves and nothing at all on
hospitality for your guests is just about as unacceptable for a
$2000 budget as for a $200,000 one.
And this couple is going beyond even that: they aren't simply
skipping the reception altogether -- they still want it, but
they want to make their guests pay for it. That's where they
really lost me. If a couple were so poor that they really
couldn't afford anything at all, for themselves or their guests,
then no one would begrudge them inviting friends and family to
witness an extremely simple, local ceremony with no reception.
But it still would be wrong to plan a restaurant reception and
expect the guests to pay for it.
#Post#: 50241--------------------------------------------------
Re: When the Bride and Groom can't afford to pay for Everyone's
Dinner
By: Twik Date: April 14, 2020, 10:21 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Well, Circus Circus is currently closed, so the issue may be
avoided that way.
#Post#: 50258--------------------------------------------------
Re: When the Bride and Groom can't afford to pay for Everyone's
Dinner
By: Hmmm Date: April 14, 2020, 12:25 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=Gellchom link=topic=1670.msg50206#msg50206
date=1586830218]
[quote author=Hmmm link=topic=1670.msg50156#msg50156
date=1586791730]
[quote author=OnyxBird link=topic=1670.msg50012#msg50012
date=1586471254]
[quote author=Hmmm link=topic=1670.msg50001#msg50001
date=1586461519]
[quote author=Jem link=topic=1670.msg49993#msg49993
date=1586456231]
[quote author=TootsNYC link=topic=1670.msg49973#msg49973
date=1586447373]
So--my point is:
If I were advising this couple, I would suggest that they think
whether there is anyone close to them that they could turn to
for help in offsetting the cost of this, either as their wedding
gift (or partial wedding gift) or as a long-term no-interest
loan.
[/quote]
This would really rub me the wrong way, especially for a
destination wedding. There is absolutely no reason why this
couple cannot have a wedding they can afford and provide some
hospitality to their guests. If they want to go to Vegas
afterword for a honeymoon, great, but there is no way I would
financially support this couple in the wedding they are
currently planning.
[/quote]
That was one of my first reactions but then I started thinking
that a wedding at Circus Circus could be way cheaper than the
cost of renting a chapel or arranging for a park to have a civil
ceremony. I took a look at the packages and they can have one
for $600 that includes 1 night hotel room, use of the chappel,
bouquet, a dvd of the ceremony & photographer & a few photos. If
they are within driving distance, I know that is way less
expensive anything you'd be able to do in my city. Here I doubt
you'd be able to get a photographer to come onsite for less than
$500 for the ceremony. The most expensive package they offered
was $1600. So let's say the couple were "splurging" for the $900
middle of the road package, the bride spends $300 on her dress
and they have another $500 in travel or other expenses. So they
are still under $2000 for the entire wedding cost. If they have
50 guests (OP said the chapel held 65 but expected less) and the
restaurant is $30 per guest then you add on the gratuity and
taxes, they are around $2000 for the dinner. They've now doubled
their budget.
But I do agree with Toots about checking with close family on
whether they'd be ok with picking up part of the reception cost
[/quote]
But why are any of those things (other that perhaps reserving a
space large enough to accommodate the attendees) needed to the
point that they would take precedence over providing any actual
hospitality to the people invited to the wedding?
Unless the couple are marrying in Vegas because it they are
traveling to the location where a majority of their guests live
(i.e., taking on the travel costs in order to save travel
costs/time for their guests), then a hotel room, professional
photographer, bouquet, new clothes, etc., are all for the
benefit of the couple, not their guests. To choose to incur
costs that indulge themselves and then claim they "can't afford"
to offer their guests the minimal hospitality of a simple meal
or even a slice of cake is the problem with the whole idea, even
if those self-indulgent costs would be on the frugal side
compared to many other peoples' weddings.
Plenty of people get married in someone's backyard, eliminating
venue rental fees. The marriage is still valid even if there are
no photographs at all, much less with no professional
videographer. There's nothing wrong with getting married in
ordinary clothes one already owns rather than special, new
"wedding" clothes. There is nothing rude about serving simple,
homemade cake from a box mix and lemonade made at home to save
on food costs (or just, in general, simple food bought at a
grocery store, rather than more expensive restaurant/catered
meals). There is, however, something very wrong about inviting
"guests" to come, at their own expense, to celebrate the couple
while the couple does nothing in terms of hospitality but does
spend money on themselves.
snip
[/quote]
I live in a upper middle class neighborhood and know very few
people who's back yard would accommodate 65 guests. You'd also
need a family member or close friend who's home has enough
bathrooms to accommodate 65 guests. People living in densely
populated areas may find those two items very challenging, let
alone finding parking.
But my original point of my post was that the concept of a Las
Vega wedding is not a lavish or extravagant option.
[/quote]
You're right, Hmmm, it's not, and it sure would look a lot worse
if they were spending a fortune on themselves and nothing on
their guests.
But that just changes the scale, not the principle. It's still
just as OnyxBird said so well: what they are spending is still
"all for the benefit of the couple, not their guests. To choose
to incur costs that indulge themselves and then claim they
'can't afford' to offer their guests the minimal hospitality of
a simple meal or even a slice of cake is the problem with the
whole idea, even if those self-indulgent costs would be on the
frugal side compared to many other peoples' weddings."
A backyard was just an example of an inexpensive or free venue
-- substitute a park, clergy person's office, or City Hall.
I don't begrudge them a wedding gown or photographer or anything
else, including Las Vegas, if that's what they want. But I
agree that you can't spend on those things and then say you
can't afford minimal hospitality for your guests. So if they
MUST have those things, and that uses up all their budget, then
just don't invite all those people. If having those people at
their wedding is important to them, then they need to change
their plans. That's how it is for everyone, in fact.
snip
[/quote]
We don't have the couple here to ask their motivation around
inviting people to their wedding ceremony. Maybe they would be
happy to have a wedding with the 2 of them and a best man and
MOH but feel pressure from family to invite other's to their
wedding ceremony. We've had at least one poster (I believe it
was Toots) who indicated she was hurt to be excluded from her
niece's wedding because the couple could not afford to host a
reception and the poster said she would have been happy to be
included and would even offer to pay for hosting other invitees.
I don't agree with their plan at all. I think it is tacky to
invite people to any event and not offer some type of
hospitality.
The reason I started down this discussion path of the cost of a
Las Vegas wedding is because another poster implied the couple
were acting extravagantly in choosing a Vegas wedding over a
simple wedding in their own town and they could redirect some of
their expenses to hosting a cake and punch reception afterwards.
If the couple is feeling pressured to invite this many people,
it doesn't matter if in Vegas or their home town. 65 or so
people would have a minimum cost of space rental (I don't know
of any JP's where who allow you to invite that many people free
of charge) and paying for an officiant. A few years back we
looked at a pavillion rental in our city and it was $250 minimum
and then chair rental was needed on top of that and because it
was over 50 people, the city required we higher security and
parking.
My personal advice would be they not invite anyone they can not
host and if family is pressuring them to invite people, then
have those family members pay to host.
#Post#: 50260--------------------------------------------------
Re: When the Bride and Groom can't afford to pay for Everyone's
Dinner
By: TootsNYC Date: April 14, 2020, 12:46 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote] Maybe they would be happy to have a wedding with the 2
of them and a best man and MOH but feel pressure from family to
invite other's to their wedding ceremony. [/quote]
This is the reasoning behind my in-laws' conviction that they
should "cover their plate" at a wedding.
They know that especially in their family the size of the
wedding is determined by family expectations. And so they do not
want their inclusion on the guest list to end up putting the
marrying couple in the hole, financially. At the very least,
they want them to come out even, but they'd prefer if the couple
ended up with some extra money (because they think wedding
presents should help set the couple up for their future--this
from people who grew up in nearly medieval rural Yugoslavia,
where wedding gifts were a couple of laying hens, or a big bag
of flour, and the party for the wedding was usually potluck to
some degree).
(My MIL has said, scornfully, "Americans give wedding gifts like
they're going to a party.")
I'll also say that part of my hurt was the idea that she thought
I needed something really fancy in order to attend. But I also
know that she had ZERO money; even buying me lunch at McDonald's
would have been a major hardship.
And I couldn't think of a way to say "I'll treat" when I
hadn't been invited even. I tried to send the message through my
sister, but that didn't work.
#Post#: 50278--------------------------------------------------
Re: When the Bride and Groom can't afford to pay for Everyone's
Dinner
By: Rose Red Date: April 14, 2020, 4:24 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
A bit off topic but the mention of McDonald's reminded me that a
McDonald's wedding is a thing in Hong Kong.
Hey, I'd rather have a Big Mac then a $50 dry chicken plate any
day. LOL
#Post#: 50281--------------------------------------------------
Re: When the Bride and Groom can't afford to pay for Everyone's
Dinner
By: HenrysMom Date: April 14, 2020, 4:39 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=Rose Red link=topic=1670.msg50278#msg50278
date=1586899476]
A bit off topic but the mention of McDonald's reminded me that a
McDonald's wedding is a thing in Hong Kong.
Hey, I'd rather have a Big Mac then a $50 dry chicken plate any
day. LOL
[/quote]
At least a Big Mac isn’t dry!
Now I want to see a MacDonald’s wedding. Dress the minister as
Ronald MacDonald and the attendants can be the other characters.
Happy Meals all around - wouldn’t have to buy monogrammed party
favors. Don’t have to decide on colors and the cake can be
tiered apple pies. Kids can go into the ball pit with their
parents.
#Post#: 50283--------------------------------------------------
Re: When the Bride and Groom can't afford to pay for Everyone's
Dinner
By: Rose Red Date: April 14, 2020, 4:43 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=HenrysMom link=topic=1670.msg50281#msg50281
date=1586900359]
[quote author=Rose Red link=topic=1670.msg50278#msg50278
date=1586899476]
A bit off topic but the mention of McDonald's reminded me that a
McDonald's wedding is a thing in Hong Kong.
Hey, I'd rather have a Big Mac then a $50 dry chicken plate any
day. LOL
[/quote]
At least a Big Mac isn’t dry!
Now I want to see a MacDonald’s wedding. Dress the minister as
Ronald MacDonald and the attendants can be the other characters.
Happy Meals all around - wouldn’t have to buy monogrammed party
favors. Don’t have to decide on colors and the cake can be
tiered apple pies. Kids can go into the ball pit with their
parents.
[/quote]
There's videos on YouTube. You nailed it on the apple pie cake!
:D
#Post#: 50284--------------------------------------------------
Re: When the Bride and Groom can't afford to pay for Everyone's
Dinner
By: HenrysMom Date: April 14, 2020, 4:49 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=Rose Red link=topic=1670.msg50283#msg50283
date=1586900630]
[quote author=HenrysMom link=topic=1670.msg50281#msg50281
date=1586900359]
[quote author=Rose Red link=topic=1670.msg50278#msg50278
date=1586899476]
A bit off topic but the mention of McDonald's reminded me that a
McDonald's wedding is a thing in Hong Kong.
Hey, I'd rather have a Big Mac then a $50 dry chicken plate any
day. LOL
[/quote]
At least a Big Mac isn’t dry!
Now I want to see a MacDonald’s wedding. Dress the minister as
Ronald MacDonald and the attendants can be the other characters.
Happy Meals all around - wouldn’t have to buy monogrammed party
favors. Don’t have to decide on colors and the cake can be
tiered apple pies. Kids can go into the ball pit with their
parents.
[/quote]
There's videos on YouTube. You nailed it on the apple pie cake!
:D
[/quote]
Wouldn’t have to worry about freezing a top layer - just go back
to McD’s on the anniversary.
#Post#: 50476--------------------------------------------------
Re: When the Bride and Groom can't afford to pay for Everyone's
Dinner
By: holly firestorm Date: April 16, 2020, 4:04 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=Rose Red link=topic=1670.msg50278#msg50278
date=1586899476]
A bit off topic but the mention of McDonald's reminded me that a
McDonald's wedding is a thing in Hong Kong.
Hey, I'd rather have a Big Mac then a $50 dry chicken plate any
day. LOL
[/quote]
Both sound equally awful to me. There are a few, very few
things I like at McDonalds. The Big Mac is not one of them.
My friends are having the dinner at a place that does offer
burgers (better than Micky D's, I hope), but they are providing
a real wedding cake and beverage for toasting.
*****************************************************
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page