Open Bar vs. Cash Bar

[Caribou]

Date: 2/18/2006 4:22:30 PM
Author: aljdewey

Date: 2/18/2006 2:26:07 PM
Author: Mara

Date: 2/18/2006 2:15:04 PM
Author: aphisiglovessae

Date: 2/18/2006 1:55:42 PM
Author: Caribou

My MOH didn''t have any alcohol at her wedding, but she choose a reception in a hotel that had a public bar in it so if guests really wanted to drink, they could go down there.

To me, that''s the same concept as a cash bar.

I was thinking the same thing Aphis! If people are still paying for drinks, regardles of whether it''s at your wedding or down the hall, it''s still a cash bar. Not that I would MIND either way....but to me I didn''t see a difference either. If people have to fork out $$ to drink at your wedding or in ''close proximity'' then it''s a cash bar.

Gee, gotta agree.....not only is that still people paying for their drinks (so how is that better than a cash bar), but they have to hike up or down to another floor to do it! Hard for me to see how that''s more thoughtful to guests than a cash bar, but that''s just me.

First I need to clarify what I wrote initally, my friend had a dry wedding because her brother, her uncle and a few other guests are recovering alcoholics. She choose to have her wedding in a hotel which happened to also have a bar, this was not the reason why she had the reception there (which I know I initally said, I was in a hurry when I wrote and not paying attention..

). Her wedding was an afternoon wedding/lunch reception and everything was over by 5PM. After we stayed at the hotel and partied a little more. It was quite fun. I didn''t care that the we had to walk down a couple flight of stairs or take an elevator down to the bar....alcohol was not the reason why I was at her wedding. I was there because she''s my best friend, I love her and her husband and I was celebrating her day with her.

I agree with most of what, Aji, has been saying. It is pretty presumptuous of guests to assume that because they like to drink the wedding should be an open bar, and anything less is tacky. And if I had to choose between lowering my dress budget or my photography budget to having an open bar to please my guests, you better bet your bottom dollar I''m going to either have a dry wedding or cash bar. I''m not going to forgo a dress that I absolutely love or get a cheap photographer and end up with pictures that suck just so my guests can get a buzz for free. 10 years from now, which one is going to last...the pictures and the memories those bring us or the alcohol?

Whenever I invite my guests over or I''m invited over to my friends, we always bring our own alcohol. It''s always been this way..not because we are cheap and won''t buy it for our guests (most of the time if we came empty handed there would still be alcohol there for us to drink) but because we aren''t going to assume that our host should have to supply it. Also, we always bring something for us and something that we know our host will like.

If I had to choose between a cash bar or dry wedding, I would choose dry wedding. I don''t think cash bars are tacky but our guests have already given us gifts so I would feel bad asking them to spend more money on our wedding. If I attend a wedding that had a cash bar, I will either not drink or drink.....either way, I''m not there for the alcohol or food, I''m there to celebrate my friends union.

 

[coda72]

This seems like a very interesting thread so I thought I''d join it! I''ve only been to one wedding that was dry (my sister''s), and I thought it was strange. Every other wedding has had unlimited drinking, including my own. I don''t judge people, if they can''t afford or don''t want to have alcohol at their weddings, that''s up to them, but me personally, I would always have alcohol.

When my husband and I throw parties at our house, we try to provide everything. We usually have mixed drinks, a few different brands of beer, and even a bottle of wine or two. We like being able to serve people whatever they want. We also have vegetarian and meat dishes for people who have food preferences. But we just think that''s part of being good hosts, trying to have stuff to make everyone have a good time. I don''t think you can cater to absolutely everyone''s whims, but it''s nice to throw a good party if you can afford it.

 

[Morticia]

My *opinion* - Yes, I think it is tacky to have a cash bar at a wedding. If I couldn't afford a full open bar, then I would cut back in another area (favors or something) or I would go with beer and wine only (a much cheaper option than full open bar). I don't consider having an open bar as paying for people to get drunk. In fact, if I do have a big wedding/reception, I will tell the bartendars that I do not want them to serve shots, if asked. I know my friends and family wouldn't drink shots at a wedding. My future B-I-L and S-I-L? Not so sure about.

They are a little immature and did shots at their wedding reception.

If it's for religious reasons, then I understand not having alcohol at a wedding. Otherwise, I just wouldn't feel comfortable asking people to pay for their drinks at my wedding. There are ways to not spend a fortune on alcohol. I think the option of beer/wine only is a great way to not break the bank on alcohol.

 

[ivanadiamond]

I don't think it is tacky per se to have a cash bar, I really think it just depends on the financial circumstance of the bride and groom and their family... we had an open top shelf bar, but I have been to plenty of weddings with cash bars as well where the couple just couldn't afford it and no one cared...

Personally, if I had a limited budget however, I would opt for wine and beer and do one signature drink...you could for example make it a signature drink from your culture or perhaps a cocktail that people drink where you will honeymoon...my friends had mojito's as their signature drink and just served beer and wine and at another wedding, the couple was honeymooning in Mexico, so they serverd Margarita's, wine and corona's.

I don't think anyone minded at all, just as with food, you make do with what you are served. I don't like the idea of a dry wedding, that's just me, but I also enjoy drinking and feel like unless my religious beliefs were against it, it is something I would want to provide if I were inviting guests over for a party, dinner or my wedding...I can choose to not imbibe in the alcohol, but I don't reserve the right to make everyone else do what works for me. If I were a vegetarian and had a big dinner party, I would still provide meat dishes for my guests, but that's just me and besides I never met a drink I didn't like

 

[Caribou]

Date: 2/20/2006 12:47:11 PM
Author: ivanadiamond

unless my religious beliefs were against it, it is something I would want to provide if I were inviting guests over for a party, dinner or my wedding...I can choose to not imbibe in the alcohol,

I have a question about this....and I''m not trying to start anything more heated about this cash bar/dry bar debate, I really am just trying to understand, I''m not a religious person so this is where my ignorance comes from.

This also is addressed to Morticia and anyone else who mention religion.

You both said that unless your religious beliefs were against it, you would have alcohol are your wedding...I guess I don''t understand why it''s okay to forgo alcohol from a wedding for that reason but for other ''beliefs'' or reasons (vegetarian or alcoholism). I realize these are different things but isn''t it kind of a contradiction to say that you aren''t going to push your beliefs on to others UNLESS it''s religious reasons. For example, you are a Bapist and because of Bapist beliefs you are not going to serve alcohol at your wedding (that you''ve invited me to

) but I''m Luthern, as well as about 100 of you other guests, and we are big drinkers (I realize this is not the case) couldn''t one say that by you not serveing alcohol at your wedding because of your Bapist beliefs you are pushing those beliefs onto us?

Again, I''m honestly not trying to start anything, I really am just wanted your feed back on this matter.

 

[ivanadiamond]

Hi caribou, I guess I wrote that because I can't imagine personally not having alcohol at a wedding...so I think the only reason I wouldn't serve it is if I had a strong religious conviction against it...But I don't and would always opt for the booze

...

 

[aljdewey]

Date: 2/20/2006 1:42:44 PM
Author: Caribou

Date: 2/20/2006 12:47:11 PM
Author: ivanadiamond

unless my religious beliefs were against it, it is something I would want to provide if I were inviting guests over for a party, dinner or my wedding...I can choose to not imbibe in the alcohol,

I have a question about this....and I''m not trying to start anything more heated about this cash bar/dry bar debate, I really am just trying to understand, I''m not a religious person so this is where my ignorance comes from.

This also is addressed to Morticia and anyone else who mention religion.

You both said that unless your religious beliefs were against it, you would have alcohol are your wedding...I guess I don''t understand why it''s okay to forgo alcohol from a wedding for that reason but for other ''beliefs'' or reasons (vegetarian or alcoholism). I realize these are different things but isn''t it kind of a contradiction to say that you aren''t going to push your beliefs on to others UNLESS it''s religious reasons. For example, you are a Bapist and because of Bapist beliefs you are not going to serve alcohol at your wedding (that you''ve invited me to

) but I''m Luthern, as well as about 100 of you other guests, and we are big drinkers (I realize this is not the case) couldn''t one say that by you not serveing alcohol at your wedding because of your Bapist beliefs you are pushing those beliefs onto us?

Again, I''m honestly not trying to start anything, I really am just wanted your feed back on this matter.

I''m not a religious person, so maybe my take on it won''t resonate as you wanted, but I''ll take a stab at it.

I believe that with "other" beliefs, they aren''t necessarily based in "morality" issues. They are preferences, or perhaps even beliefs, but they don''t create a "moral conflict" the way religious aspects can.

For example, if I''m a vegetarian, I personally don''t believe or support killing animals for food, but I realize that you may. However, our differences on that topic don''t create a moral dilemma for me.....it''s just that I choose to be vegetarian and you don''t.

If I''m religious, however, it could be that our differences cross moral platforms that might present a conflict for me. If I were a member of one of the middle eastern religions that considers the cow sacred, then serving beef would present a significant moral dilemma for me that is much more weighty than just "I''m a vegetarian and you''re not."

Maybe a better way to put it.....observing personal beliefs is an individual thing; religious beliefs are about more than an individual observation of a practice. So being a vegetarian is about an individual''s choice to abstain from meat, but it doesn''t require others to meet this standard. Being Hindu, though, is to belong to a community that all believe killing cows is sacriligious, and hosting an event where beef would be offered offends one''s moral choice.

Not sure if this is making the distinction succinctly....but I guess religious observances are about more than a personal, individual following and perhaps that''s the difference.

 

[Caribou]

Date: 2/20/2006 1:58:09 PM
Author: aljdewey

I''m not a religious person, so maybe my take on it won''t resonate as you wanted, but I''ll take a stab at it.

I believe that with ''other'' beliefs, they aren''t necessarily based in ''morality'' issues. They are preferences, or perhaps even beliefs, but they don''t create a ''moral conflict'' the way religious aspects can.

For example, if I''m a vegetarian, I personally don''t believe or support killing animals for food, but I realize that you may. However, our differences on that topic don''t create a moral dilemma for me.....it''s just that I choose to be vegetarian and you don''t.

If I''m religious, however, it could be that our differences cross moral platforms that might present a conflict for me. If I were a member of one of the middle eastern religions that considers the cow sacred, then serving beef would present a significant moral dilemma for me that is much more weighty than just ''I''m a vegetarian and you''re not.''

Maybe a better way to put it.....observing personal beliefs is an individual thing; religious beliefs are about more than an individual observation of a practice. So being a vegetarian is about an individual''s choice to abstain from meat, but it doesn''t require others to meet this standard. Being Hindu, though, is to belong to a community that all believe killing cows is sacriligious, and hosting an event where beef would be offered offends one''s moral choice.

Not sure if this is making the distinction succinctly....but I guess religious observances are about more than a personal, individual following and perhaps that''s the difference.

Thank Aji, you explained it perfectly for me. I feel so ignorant when it comes to religious sometimes.

Ivana...I would also opt for booze too...well unless it impede in my dress budget...and I to haven''t found a drink that didn''t like me.

Well except maybe those 10 shots of tequila....

 

[icekid]

I find it kind of weird that people EXPECT to have all they can drink alcohol at a wedding too. When you invite someone to celebrate your wedding with you, you''re not supposed to "expect" a gift. It''s rude. Yet, the guests should expect to be given as much alcohol as they want? I dunno.. it just seems weird. I think you should do what you can afford! Unless something unexpected happens, we will very likely have an open bar at my wedding. but if for some reason we can''t swing the cash (I''m in med school!) then I hope my guests don''t find me rude for including them in our day minus free alcohol.

 

[aphisiglovessae]

Date: 2/20/2006 1:58:09 PM
Author: aljdewey

Date: 2/20/2006 1:42:44 PM
Author: Caribou

Date: 2/20/2006 12:47:11 PM
Author: ivanadiamond

unless my religious beliefs were against it, it is something I would want to provide if I were inviting guests over for a party, dinner or my wedding...I can choose to not imbibe in the alcohol,

I have a question about this....and I'm not trying to start anything more heated about this cash bar/dry bar debate, I really am just trying to understand, I'm not a religious person so this is where my ignorance comes from.

This also is addressed to Morticia and anyone else who mention religion.

You both said that unless your religious beliefs were against it, you would have alcohol are your wedding...I guess I don't understand why it's okay to forgo alcohol from a wedding for that reason but for other 'beliefs' or reasons (vegetarian or alcoholism). I realize these are different things but isn't it kind of a contradiction to say that you aren't going to push your beliefs on to others UNLESS it's religious reasons. For example, you are a Bapist and because of Bapist beliefs you are not going to serve alcohol at your wedding (that you've invited me to

) but I'm Luthern, as well as about 100 of you other guests, and we are big drinkers (I realize this is not the case) couldn't one say that by you not serveing alcohol at your wedding because of your Bapist beliefs you are pushing those beliefs onto us?

Again, I'm honestly not trying to start anything, I really am just wanted your feed back on this matter.

I'm not a religious person, so maybe my take on it won't resonate as you wanted, but I'll take a stab at it.

I believe that with 'other' beliefs, they aren't necessarily based in 'morality' issues. They are preferences, or perhaps even beliefs, but they don't create a 'moral conflict' the way religious aspects can.

For example, if I'm a vegetarian, I personally don't believe or support killing animals for food, but I realize that you may. However, our differences on that topic don't create a moral dilemma for me.....it's just that I choose to be vegetarian and you don't.

If I'm religious, however, it could be that our differences cross moral platforms that might present a conflict for me. If I were a member of one of the middle eastern religions that considers the cow sacred, then serving beef would present a significant moral dilemma for me that is much more weighty than just 'I'm a vegetarian and you're not.'

Maybe a better way to put it.....observing personal beliefs is an individual thing; religious beliefs are about more than an individual observation of a practice. So being a vegetarian is about an individual's choice to abstain from meat, but it doesn't require others to meet this standard. Being Hindu, though, is to belong to a community that all believe killing cows is sacriligious, and hosting an event where beef would be offered offends one's moral choice.

Not sure if this is making the distinction succinctly....but I guess religious observances are about more than a personal, individual following and perhaps that's the difference.

But would you only serve vegetarian dishes at your wedding? Just a question.

It's kinda to prove the point that if you ARE of a certain religion that doesn't believe in drinking or whatever, but you have a lot of family and friends who probably don't feel the same way, would you adjust your wedding to better suit them or yourself? It's your wedding right? Say you had a completely vegetarian menu for your wedding because that is what you wanted and could afford: Do you think anyone should be offended because you chose not to feed them beef? Same goes for alcohol in my opinion.

ETA: Al, this is not to rebut you or anything, you just happened to bring up this thought in my head with your post about being vegetarian.

 

[aphisiglovessae]

Reading that again, I don't think I made my point clear. What I meant to point out is the same as what a lot of other people have already said. It's your wedding so you should do what you feel comfortable with. If you are a vegetarian or a non-drinker and you choose to have your wedding as you see fit, your guests should not complain or be offended. If someone can't afford an open bar and a cash bar is a better option or even a combination of a cash bar and open beer/wine, but they don't want to cut out alcohol all together, then they should do it. The way I see it is: If you have it available and they don't want it for whatever reason, they don't have to have it. But it's not very nice to think poorly of someone because they didn't completely please you. You can't please everyone all of the time. What may be tacky to one guests, may be acceptable to another.

ETA: We have dinner with friends every week and we switch who's cooking and who's house every week. Everyone always brings their own alcohol. Why? Well, they've gone through all this trouble to cook and prepare a nice dinner for us already. We shouldn't "expect" anything more. If we bring alcohol and they offer theirs, we might accept one or two, but we would still drink our own (not that a wedding should be BYOB, but you get my point about comparing a wedding to hosting a party in your own home, right?).

 

[saturn]

I think that it basically boils down to two basic viewpoints:

Viewpoint A: You are HOSTING a wedding- this is the equivalent to holding a party at your own home. Therefore, you can decide whether to have alcohol or not, and if you are serving alcohol you are free to serve just beer and/or wine. However, it is inappropriate to offer to sell alcohol to your guests ( i.e. cash bar), because you would never have guests over for dinner, serve them a meal, and then offer them a glass of wine if they are willing to pay for it.

Viewpoint B: You are inviting guests to CELEBRATE WITH YOU - this is the equivalent to inviting your guests to come on a vacation with you. They should not anticipate that you will pay all of their expenses, but of course you will try to be considerate and give them options. Thus, if you can''t afford to pay for their drinks, you might still give them the option of buying drinks for themselves (cash bar). Just because you can''t afford to pay for everyone''s alcohol, the guest shouldn''t be prevented from buying it if they so choose.

It seems like this whole argument comes down to these two perspectives. I don''t know if one is "correct" or if so, which one. It seems to me that both perspectives are reasonable.
If you subscribe to viewpoint A, then a cash bar is completely inappropriate.
If you subscribe to viewpoint B, then a cash bar is perfectly acceptable.

I guess you just have to decide which viewpoint you agree with. Ultimately, I would hope that wedding guests are gracious and considerate no matter what the bar situation is.

 

[rainbowtrout]

I don''t think we''ll be having drinks at my wedding for one big reason:

Both families are divorced and hate each other, AND the divored parents dislike the other set of parents. So I don''t really want to throw any sort of alcohol into the mix.

That said, I might spring for wine only and a champagne toast...if a bottle a table can start a fight it was going to start anyway. Also if my adopted grandparents and mom decide to help pay (which they might flat insist on knowing them) then they will have some say in it too.

My dad jokingly says we''ll have to have police escorts for people to go to the bathroom

I''m planning on just issueing a pre-wedding ultimatium that if you can''t behave don''t come. Period. I''m also thinking of doing it on the neutral groud of my adopted grandparent''s house instead of one of his families'' homes.

I see nothing wrong with a small wedding that doesn''t break the bank...on the one hand it is "supposed" to be about how big a party can you throw=how ready you are to wed, but I don''t really buy into that idea.

 

[ellewoods]

Cash bars are tacky. Period. Tacky and inappropriate.

As another poster said, what would you serve guests who come to your house for dinner? Serve that at your wedding.

The pic Matatora posted said it perfectly. If you can''t afford to have a whole open bar, then do just wine and beer. Add a "specialty cocktail" like a rum punch, margaritas, etc. if you would like to. That certainly won''t break the bank.

When you invite people to your wedding, you are inviting them to a party and meal. These people are coming from far away, taking time from their lives and plans, spending money on hotel rooms, in many cases airfare, meals out of town, and a wedding gift for you (I spend $100-$200 on a wedding gift). They love you and want to help celebrate your marriage. I think its incredibly tacky to ask them to pay for alcohol at the reception. If you can''t afford all choices, then simply offer wine and beer. Buy cases and it won''t break the bank.

I understand that some situations, where many family members are alcoholics, or for relegious reasons, it may be appropriate to have no alcohol at all. That''s your choice and can be an appropriate one in certain circumstances.

But why the insane worry about people having too much to drink? No one is going to get drunk and take off all their clothes or kill somebody at your wedding. These are your friends and family. When making plans to go to a dinner with them, would you decline because you''re worried they''ll have a couple too many glasses of wine? Of course not. Your guests are grown adults, and the ones who are not legally of age to drink should be prevented from doing so by their parents and event personnel at your reception site.

 

[ellewoods]

Saturn:

I think you make an excellent point.

I fully subscribe to viewpoint A -- when you invite guests to your wedding, this is akin to inviting them to your home for dinner. Thus you have the choice of what foods to offer, as well as which beverages and the range of choices (or lack thereof). But I find it extremely rude and tacky to have alcohol available at a wedding -- but only if the guests wish to pay for it.

When I go to someone''s home for dinner, I always bring a a couple bottles of wine. Sometimes I bring an appetizer or salad also, if I''ve asked the host "would you like me to bring anything?" and she/he has a specific request of me. Sometimes flowers and wine. I would never show up empty handed to a meal where I am a guest at someone''s home, but this isn''t to provide the alcohol for me and my BF to drink, it is a proper thing to do in terms of etiquette. If my dinner hosts did not offer me an alcoholic beverage, I wouldn''t think it was rude, but I would be offended if they poured glasses for themselves and didn''t offer me any, but expected me to bring my own. Offering a cash bar at a wedding is the equivilant of that for me.

Inviting guests to your wedding is NEVER akin to asking your friends to go on a group vacation with you. If it were a group vacation, your guests would have equal input in terms of the location, what dates, how expensive the hotel is that you''ll be staying at, how far away the vacation location is, how expensive the plane tickets are, whether you drive or fly, etc. When I am invited to a wedding, I have no say in any of those things. I am told what date, what location, and often which hotel to stay at. If the location is too far away, the hotel is too expensive for my budget (and there aren''t less expensive alternative options), I can''t afford a plane ticket or whatever....my only choice is to not attend. So I strongly feel that the bride and groom and hosting the reception and should not ask their guests to pay for alcohol, if they choose to have alcohol at the wedding.

If I am invited to a destination wedding and I choose to attend, however, I don''t expect the bride and groom to pay for my plane ticket and hotel and all expenses. But I would expect that the wedding reception portion is hosted by the bride and groom -- after all, I would not have gone to that destination but for their wedding.

Also, in my personal opinion, I don''t see the point of having wedding favors if you''re going to have a cash bar. It just seems like wasting money on little trinkets that guests don''t really appreciate or want or even remember to take home with them....while you''re telling your guests they''re not important enough to you to provide a true hosted meal/beverages for. If you can''t afford even just beer and wine, that''s OK, but then I wonder why waste your limited money on favors?

I understand there are all sorts of reasons to go with no alcohol, limited alcohol, etc. but my personal opinion is that I would never ask guests to pay for alcohol. It seems as improper as asking guests to pay for their cake.

 

[Mara]

"you're telling your guests they're not important enough to you to provide a true hosted meal/beverages for. "

______

I don't think there has been one wedding I have ever been to....hosted bar or cash bar or lobster dinner vs pasta...where I have EVER thought that the bride and groom were 'telling me I was not important to them' by their food or drink choices. Whenever I go to a wedding, I just eat and drink whatever is offered or available, and if there is a cash bar, then I may get a specialty drink there. If not, no big deal. I won't DIE if I don't have a drink for a few hours or I don't have filet mignon at dinner.

I don't even drink that much, I didn't drink at our wedding because what we had for the guests wasn't what I drank.

Also there are some weddings we don't even go to or weren't invited because maybe it's just a neighbor or someone we don't know super well or just met and know they are getting married, and 99% of the time I still send a decent $50 gift from their registry. Why? Becuase I want to and I love giving for events like that. It's not about give and take IMO.

So it's not about how much the gift cost or how much you should be getting at a wedding, period. It's about having a good time, however that works out for you and your guests.

 

[monarch64]

Date: 2/17/2006 3:49:10 PM
Author:SarFarSuperstar
So Ebree''s Budget Bride thread made me think about this.

What are y''alls thoughts and feelings about open bars vs. cash bars? What did you think about any weddings that you went to with either of these options? Would you rather go to a wedding where no alcohol was served at all? Just some things that I''ve been pondering since I''ve started planning. I appreciate any and all thoughts!

SarFarSuperstar: In my honest opinion, I think that WHATEVER you choose to do re. open/cash bars will be fine. Obviously, this is one of those "hot topics" that will be forever debatable. You''ve heard so many different perspectives on this thread, all of which are worthy of consideration on your part. I really think it all depends on what you want, as the bride (and groom, if he''s taking part in your decision.) For myself, reading back through all the posts and opinions on the subject, I would be leary of making the decision to have a dry or cash bar wedding, simply because there are such a variety of different tastes out there! Only you can make the decision based on the guests you are inviting, many of whom you know well enough to decide whether alcohol will be a factor in their happiness during your celebration/reception. People you choose to invite to witness your vows and celebrate with your afterwards will preferably be known by you, your husband to be, or respective families, well enough for you to judge what is the proper decision here. Members of PS who don''t know you or your friends and family really can''t do the judging for you.

I hope you''ll let us know what you''ve decided, and give us a bit of background on your decision so that your own decision is of some help to others who will inevitably face the same question! Good luck with your decision, and if you''ve already posted it, I apologize! (This was a rather long thread, and although I posted in the middle I admit I haven''t been able to keep up with it all, lol!)

 

[Caribou]

Date: 2/21/2006 12:44:35 AM
Author: Mara
''you''re telling your guests they''re not important enough to you to provide a true hosted meal/beverages for. ''

I agree with what Mara said in response to this. I have never been friend hosted event (wedding, birthday party, dinner party, etc) where my friends have told me I wasn''t important to them because they didn''t serve something I didn''t like. Also, if my friend is hosting a dinner party, I wouldn''t assume that she will provide everything for that night. I usually call and ask if she needs me to bring anything. If she says no, then I presist untill she tells me. Even if it''s cups, I always bring something to dinner parties.

I think some people are just not getting the ''if you can''t afford it'' part. I agree that beer/wine is cheaper than a full on bar. However, there are some of us here that can not afford a big wedding. My wedding is going to cost no more than $6k, not because we can''t afford more but because I really just can not justify spending anymore than that. Even if I won the lottery, I might add a couple thousand to the budget but that''s about it. Big parties just aren''t our thing and the only reason why we are doing a reception is for our parents and grandmothers. However, there are some whose budget is $6k because they can''t afford more. I think for them, if they want to do a cash bar so the alcohol option is there, or even drink tickets, than great! I honestly think the first thing I would cut out in order not to go over the budget is the liquor. If my friends or family are coming to my wedding only because of the alcohol, then I don''t want them there. They should be coming to see me and my FI become become husband and wife. Period.

 

[njc]

Date: 2/20/2006 1:42:44 PM
Author: Caribou

Date: 2/20/2006 12:47:11 PM
Author: ivanadiamond

unless my religious beliefs were against it, it is something I would want to provide if I were inviting guests over for a party, dinner or my wedding...I can choose to not imbibe in the alcohol,

I have a question about this....and I''m not trying to start anything more heated about this cash bar/dry bar debate, I really am just trying to understand, I''m not a religious person so this is where my ignorance comes from.

This also is addressed to Morticia and anyone else who mention religion.

You both said that unless your religious beliefs were against it, you would have alcohol are your wedding...I guess I don''t understand why it''s okay to forgo alcohol from a wedding for that reason but for other ''beliefs'' or reasons (vegetarian or alcoholism). I realize these are different things but isn''t it kind of a contradiction to say that you aren''t going to push your beliefs on to others UNLESS it''s religious reasons. For example, you are a Bapist and because of Bapist beliefs you are not going to serve alcohol at your wedding (that you''ve invited me to

) but I''m Luthern, as well as about 100 of you other guests, and we are big drinkers (I realize this is not the case) couldn''t one say that by you not serveing alcohol at your wedding because of your Bapist beliefs you are pushing those beliefs onto us?

Again, I''m honestly not trying to start anything, I really am just wanted your feed back on this matter.

Honestly, i dont know that we would have had a dry reception if my grandmothers were still alive. If we did, *I* would have done it out of respect for them (and to make sure they would come), which I know isnt very repectful of my or DHs family or any of our guests wanting to have alcohol. Like i mentioned before, Im sure it would have been a huge/interesting fight. I can remember one Christmas dinner when one grandmother refused to eat and tried to leave because there was a bottle of wine on the table. No one was going to force her to drink it, but it was just that it was there... a little extreme i know.

On a similar note, a good friend got married several weeks after us. Her wedding had an open bar but only because the grooms family was paying for the reception. If her parents had been paying for it, no alcohol. She even waited until her parents left the reception before she started drinking out of respect for them.

Like i said before, Ive probably gone to more dry weddings than not because of being Baptist and think nothing of it... i think its a regional thing. How many Baptist Churches are there in NYC vs Atlanta? Someone mentioned Morman weddings being dry... I bet in Utah they think nothing of it either.

 

[ellewoods]

No need to beat the dead horse, I know, but I just wanted to clarify that I completely understand and agree with the fact that everyone has a different budget and the bride and groom should choose their wedding details to reflect what they want, and what they can afford. I don''t advocate blowing your budget so you can provide filet mignon or a open bar with premium choices.

That being said, if a couple is going to offer limited food at a reception, I think it should be noted on the invitation. If I am invited to a wedding that begins at 6pm and has a reception following, for example, guests will expect that a meal of some sort will be served. If I arrive to the reception and there is only chips and dip and a cheese tray, well I don''t think that''s appropriate to serve unless clearly indicated to guests so they can eat beforehand. I don''t think this would be a bad idea in terms of alcohol either -- if you''re going to have a cash bar, it''d be appropriate to indicate this somehow, so that your guests can bring money if they wish to purchase drinks.

I have been to many weddings with differing styles on the alcohol, and I''m just speaking from my experiences. Obviously there''s not one perfect choice that will fit everyone''s situation. The weddings I''ve been to fall all over the spectrum: 1) absolutely no alcohol (Mormon wedding in my hometown in California); 2) wine and beer provided only; 3) wine and beer provided, optional cash bar; 4) fully open premium bar; 5) open bar for cocktail hour, then wine and beer only, etc. etc.

When I attend a wedding I appreciate whatever the hosts have decided to provide. But I do view weddings as an event that is hosted, and thus a cash bar is inappropriate. Budget concerns, religious issues, dislike of alcohol, alcoholism....there are plenty of reasons why someone might want to limit or not have any alcohol. But I still think you should provide what you wish to and can afford, but shouldn''t offer extras that guests must pay for. Even on a small budget, you can provide some alcohol if you would like alcohol at your wedding.

You can purchase a decent case of wine for as low as $70 these days -- probably even less if you buy wholesale or look for deals. A few cases of wine and one beer selection can be had for a few hundred dollars.

 

[Caribou]

Date: 2/22/2006 2:25:42 AM
Author: ellewoods
That being said, if a couple is going to offer limited food at a reception, I think it should be noted on the invitation. If I am invited to a wedding that begins at 6pm and has a reception following, for example, guests will expect that a meal of some sort will be served. If I arrive to the reception and there is only chips and dip and a cheese tray, well I don''t think that''s appropriate to serve unless clearly indicated to guests so they can eat beforehand. I don''t think this would be a bad idea in terms of alcohol either -- if you''re going to have a cash bar, it''d be appropriate to indicate this somehow, so that your guests can bring money if they wish to purchase drinks.

I don''t agree. I''ve been to several weddings...I''ve never expected anything as a guest. If the reception is right after the wedding, chances are the food will be served within an hour of that. Why should the ''hosts'' have to provide anything more, as far as food goes? Sure it''s nice when it happens but I don''t think I''ve been to many that have. I went to a wedding a couple weeks ago, the reception was right after the wedding and they had a veggie and cheese tray out to hold us over until the meal was served. It was fine for us. If we know a meal is coming why do we need more than just that?

I agree that some how some way the guest should be aware if the bar is a cash bar. I don''t know that it''s necessarly appropriat to indicate that on the invites...how would you do that? A little note with the directions?

Anywho, my ceremony/reception will be held at the same place, the only meal we will be serving is main lunch buffet which will be served within an hour of the ceremony. If there are guests that are hungry and can''t wait..I''m sure there''s a McDonald''s down the road they can go to.

I''m wondering if this is a state thing...seriously. I''ve never been to a wedding that had a cocktail hour or anything like that. I''ve only been the receptions that served one meal. I''ve been to very nice weddings to very casual weddings...they''ve all been the same.

 

[aljdewey]

Date: 2/22/2006 2:25:42 AM
Author: ellewoods

That being said, if a couple is going to offer limited food at a reception, I think it should be noted on the invitation. If I am invited to a wedding that begins at 6pm and has a reception following, for example, guests will expect that a meal of some sort will be served. If I arrive to the reception and there is only chips and dip and a cheese tray, well I don't think that's appropriate to serve unless clearly indicated to guests so they can eat beforehand. I don't think this would be a bad idea in terms of alcohol either -- if you're going to have a cash bar, it'd be appropriate to indicate this somehow, so that your guests can bring money if they wish to purchase drinks.

Oh my goodness!

I have to say that in my 20 plus years of attending weddings of every variety, I've never needed anyone to let me know what they'll be doing in advance.

I've also never seen anyone show up to a wedding without a wallet, so the thought that they need to be advised to bring money is just outlandish to me. Presumably, your guests are adults? They know enough to have some money on them?

For the love of god.....even if someone told me I wouldn't need one red cent to attend an event, I'd never ever go anywhere without a wallet and some money! Even if it's open bar, I'd at least want some cash to have the decency to tip the bartender.

I assume that they will provide something.....snacks, a meal, whatever. I'm there to celebrate with them, and whatever they provide suits me just fine. And honestly, that's what I expect from my guests.

You're coming to help share in celebrating our day. I will provide something for you to eat and drink, and I'll of course select those things with my guests' pleasure and preferences in mind. (Of course, I'd let you all know if I choose a "cake and champagne" or "heavy apps" only selection). If that's not good enough, then I won't be offended if you decline.

Thankfully, most of my family/friends are easy-going and low-maintenance, and they fall into the "just there to celebrate with you" type.

 

[aljdewey]

Date: 2/22/2006 9:39:51 AM
Author: Caribou

I don''t agree. I''ve been to several weddings...I''ve never expected anything as a guest. If the reception is right after the wedding, chances are the food will be served within an hour of that. Why should the ''hosts'' have to provide anything more, as far as food goes? Sure it''s nice when it happens but I don''t think I''ve been to many that have. I went to a wedding a couple weeks ago, the reception was right after the wedding and they had a veggie and cheese tray out to hold us over until the meal was served. It was fine for us. If we know a meal is coming why do we need more than just that?

Anywho, my ceremony/reception will be held at the same place, the only meal we will be serving is main lunch buffet which will be served within an hour of the ceremony. If there are guests that are hungry and can''t wait..I''m sure there''s a McDonald''s down the road they can go to.

Right on!!!!!!!!!!

Date: 2/22/2006 9:39:51 AM
Author: Caribou
I''m wondering if this is a state thing...seriously.

In all honesty, I don''t think so. I think some people are more worried about appearances and how much they can impress everyone. My neighbor went to a wedding last summer....daughter of her good friend. They live in a "pedigree conscious" town. Every selection they made (lobster/filet meals, expensive champagne, etc.) was discussed ad nauseum, and the overriding theme was "but what will it look like if ours isn''t at least as nice as Jenna''s was last year?" (Another family member who married the year before).

Some people treat weddings as their chance to outdo others or compete for the ''best function''. And if that''s important to them, more power to them. They are afraid of how it will look if they don''t have X or Y.

Not for me, but different strokes for different folks.

 

[SarFarSuperstar]

"Thankfully, most of my family/friends are easy-going and low-maintenance, and they fall into the "just there to celebrate with you" type. "

I'm lucky in that regard, too. My friends and family are just excited about our marriage (and my dress, of course!) but mundane details like flower arrangements and food haven't really been brought up, probably because they really just don't care. I want my reception to be a fun party (and we're generally known as fun people!

) , but I am absolutely not willing to compromise on the things that really matter to me (i.e. my dress) to be able to offer an better array of food and beverage.

So there's my answer. I'm going with cash bar- let the chips fall where they may! Just to offer one more thing, we're fairly young and paying for this wedding mostly by ourselves (with some generousity from our parents). Our friends are young and our families are unpretentious. We both come from pretty middle class backgrounds- and our main wedding philosophy is this: The wedding is just one day- the marriage lasts forever. We don't want to drive ourselves nuts over something like a wedding, which although important- is not the end all-be all of our lives together.

One exception to the cash bar though: our wedding party (minus his 17 year old best man) will be served free drinks- I don't want my bridesmaids to have to stash 20s in their bras!

 

[Caribou]

Date: 2/22/2006 10:15:38 AM
Author: aljdewey

Date: 2/22/2006 9:39:51 AM
Author: Caribou
I''m wondering if this is a state thing...seriously.

In all honesty, I don''t think so. I think some people are more worried about appearances and how much they can impress everyone. My neighbor went to a wedding last summer....daughter of her good friend. They live in a ''pedigree conscious'' town. Every selection they made (lobster/filet meals, expensive champagne, etc.) was discussed ad nauseum, and the overriding theme was ''but what will it look like if ours isn''t at least as nice as Jenna''s was last year?'' (Another family member who married the year before).

Some people treat weddings as their chance to outdo others or compete for the ''best function''. And if that''s important to them, more power to them. They are afraid of how it will look if they don''t have X or Y.

Not for me, but different strokes for different folks.

That makes sense...and if that''s how some are then great!

I for one, really have no need for a reception....it''s only being done for our parents...mothers and grandmothers. Then there''s my friend who is getting married next month...she sent out 550 invitations!

Can you imagine?? I haven''t spoken to her in over a year and I still get invited.

Not that I''m complaining and I am going to her wedding but I had no intention on inviting her to mine...obviously she''s inviting anyone and everyone she knows. Should make for an interesting wedding.

 

[Mara]

SarFar...glad to hear you made your decision...

One of the best weddings we have been to in the last few years had a cash bar (last summer)....we didn't even blink an eye. There was a cocktail hour with passed appetizers and a huge line at the bar! No one had a problem forking over for anything they wanted other than the standard wine or soft drinks. These were all 30+ adults basically...so maybe the older you get the less you really care about what is appropriate or what others think? hehee.

There was poured wine at dinner and champagne for the toasts. But anything else was from the bar.

Also, Greg would never leave the house without his wallet, so we always have cash even if I forgot to put a $20 in my evening purse!

 

[VuittonGal]

I don''t like cash bars at all. I don''t think you should expect your guests to pay for their own drinks at your wedding.

 

[ellewoods]

"If we know a meal is coming why do we need more than just that?"

Caribou:

I'm sorry I didn't make my point clear above.

I didn't mean that the bride and groom need to provide any food or amount of food in particular, or that they need to provide pre-dinner food, etc. I also don't think that the bride and groom have to specify to guests exactly what food will be served. And I didn't mean they have to provide something substantial before the meal. I was talking about if there is NO meal served at all -- then I think the bride and groom should inform the guests of this.

My comment was that if I'm invited to a wedding that begins around 5pm, and there is a reception to follow, I would assume that a meal will be served because the reception is around dinner time, unless I'm told otherwise. So for example, if you're invited to a wedding with the reception at 6pm or 7pm, but there is NOT a meal provided but rather just punch and cake, or a cheese platter and such, I think the bride and groom need to inform guests of this so that guests can prepare beforehand (and eat before they go to the wedding or plan to eat dinner after the reception). Same goes for a wedding that's held around lunchtime.

 

[monarch64]

Not to drag this thread out even longer, but I have to agree with Elle. If you''re going to have a wedding reception during mealtime hours, but you''re NOT going to serve a "full" meal, I think it is imperative you inform your guests of your intentions via your invitations, due to assumptions your guests will make based on the time of your reception. Hence, if you''re going to serve only apps/desserts/cocktails, this should be noted on your invites. The assumption is normally that if the recept. takes place during breakfast, lunch, or dinner hours, that you will provide your guests with a meal, including entrees.

 

[Caribou]

Date: 2/23/2006 11:39:21 PM
Author: ellewoods
''If we know a meal is coming why do we need more than just that?''

Caribou:

I''m sorry I didn''t make my point clear above.

I didn''t mean that the bride and groom need to provide any food or amount of food in particular, or that they need to provide pre-dinner food, etc. I also don''t think that the bride and groom have to specify to guests exactly what food will be served. And I didn''t mean they have to provide something substantial before the meal. I was talking about if there is NO meal served at all -- then I think the bride and groom should inform the guests of this.

My comment was that if I''m invited to a wedding that begins around 5pm, and there is a reception to follow, I would assume that a meal will be served because the reception is around dinner time, unless I''m told otherwise. So for example, if you''re invited to a wedding with the reception at 6pm or 7pm, but there is NOT a meal provided but rather just punch and cake, or a cheese platter and such, I think the bride and groom need to inform guests of this so that guests can prepare beforehand (and eat before they go to the wedding or plan to eat dinner after the reception). Same goes for a wedding that''s held around lunchtime.

Ahhhhh, I agree. Guests should told if a full on meal will be served or only appetizers. That way they can get food before is need be.