Deleted

[Deleted User]

Deleted 

lovesclimbing

Knottie8f6a5db42e0a0a3d said:

I'm having around 200 guests for wedding breakfast and reception. However finding a ceremony venue that can seat that many people is very difficult. 

Town halls aren't normally big enough and renting another venue of that size (to fit 200 guests) is outside my budget. It would cost thousands. Is it rude to have a smaller amount for the ceremony and invite everyone else to the rest of the day (e.g. the lunch and dancing). I've found places that fit around 80 guests for the ceremony.

Yes, it is rude. It's called a tiered reception and usually makes guests feel less important and like they're invited just for a gift.

Why not skip the breakfast reception, invite everyone to the lunch reception, and then just have the ceremony right before the lunch in the same room? I have attended weddings before where guests are seated at their tables for the ceremony, and they have been lovely. 

[Deleted User]

lovesclimbing said:

Knottie8f6a5db42e0a0a3d said:

I'm having around 200 guests for wedding breakfast and reception. However finding a ceremony venue that can seat that many people is very difficult. 

Town halls aren't normally big enough and renting another venue of that size (to fit 200 guests) is outside my budget. It would cost thousands. Is it rude to have a smaller amount for the ceremony and invite everyone else to the rest of the day (e.g. the lunch and dancing). I've found places that fit around 80 guests for the ceremony.

Yes, it is rude. It's called a tiered reception and usually makes guests feel less important and like they're invited just for a gift.

Why not skip the breakfast reception, invite everyone to the lunch reception, and then just have the ceremony right before the lunch in the same room? I have attended weddings before where guests are seated at their tables for the ceremony, and they have been lovely. 

 I'm not sure you understand what a wedding breakfast is.

"A wedding breakfast is a dinner given to the bride, bridegroom, and guests at the wedding reception. The phrase is still used in British English." (This is from wikipedia).

A wedding breakfast or wedding lunch if you want to call it that are the same thing. I'm from the UK. Also, many register office often hold only about 8 people or less. Many local register offices are tiny.  

BTW, if you are not from the UK a register office wedding is a bit similar to getting married at court, (which I believe can be done in the USA, not in the UK). It is a local government building where civil marriages are conducted and births, marriages, and deaths are recorded with the issue of certificates. People go there for non-religious marriages and they are normally very small. The town hall I referred to is basically a register office.

I've been to weddings in these places before where more guests came to the lunch. So are you saying that those who hold weddings in a register office should only have 8 guests or less? I'm lucky to get a town hall for 80 people!  

You can't hold a wedding anywhere you like in the UK. The locations has to be licensed to conduct weddings. My reception venue does has a licence but it would take about 2 hours to convert it from a ceremony seating arrangement to a dining arrangement, which is a long time for the guests! Also, leaving as a dining arrangement is not very conducive to watching the ceremony, is it?

[Deleted User]

TrixieJess

Knottie8f6a5db42e0a0a3d said:

lovesclimbing said:

Knottie8f6a5db42e0a0a3d said:

I'm having around 200 guests for wedding breakfast and reception. However finding a ceremony venue that can seat that many people is very difficult. 

Town halls aren't normally big enough and renting another venue of that size (to fit 200 guests) is outside my budget. It would cost thousands. Is it rude to have a smaller amount for the ceremony and invite everyone else to the rest of the day (e.g. the lunch and dancing). I've found places that fit around 80 guests for the ceremony.

Yes, it is rude. It's called a tiered reception and usually makes guests feel less important and like they're invited just for a gift.

Why not skip the breakfast reception, invite everyone to the lunch reception, and then just have the ceremony right before the lunch in the same room? I have attended weddings before where guests are seated at their tables for the ceremony, and they have been lovely. 

 I'm not sure you understand what a wedding breakfast is.

"A wedding breakfast is a dinner given to the bride, bridegroom, and guests at the wedding reception. The phrase is still used in British English." (This is from wikipedia).

A wedding breakfast or wedding lunch if you want to call it that are the same thing. I'm from the UK. Also, many register office often hold only about 8 people or less. Many local register offices are tiny.  

BTW, if you are not from the UK a register office wedding is a bit similar to getting married at court, (which I believe can be done in the USA, not in the UK). It is a local government building where civil marriages are conducted and births, marriages, and deaths are recorded with the issue of certificates. People go there for non-religious marriages and they are normally very small. The town hall I referred to is basically a register office.

I've been to weddings in these places before where more guests came to the lunch. So are you saying that those who hold weddings in a register office should only have 8 guests or less? I'm lucky to get a town hall for 80 people!  

You can't hold a wedding anywhere you like in the UK. The locations has to be licensed to conduct weddings. My reception venue does has a licence but it would take about 2 hours to convert it from a ceremony seating arrangement to a dining arrangement, which is a long time for the guests! Also, leaving as a dining arrangement is not very conducive to watching the ceremony, is it?

It's still bloody rude. I'm pretty sure @LondonLisa and @glasgowtolondon as well as any of our numerous British brides would agree. You invite everyone to the ceremony and reception. The only time this is waived is with an intimate ceremony (immediate family only) and a larger reception later.

InLoveInQueens

If you can't invite all your guests to both your ceremony and reception, you need to cut your guest list or find another venue, period. Your reception/breakfast/lunch/whatever it's called wherever you are is a thank you to your guests for witnessing your ceremony. Inviting guests just to the reception is rude and gift-grabby and makes them second tier, even if they still get a full reception, they're not invited to the full wedding. 

If your lunch venue is registered (edited because I misread) but it takes 2 hours, something is wrong with that venue. It's really not that hard to flip a room, no matter how long of a list you've posted. Can you pay for extra help so the room flip can be done in half the time and you can have a cocktail hour while that happens? And plenty of people here on TK have had their weddings in their reception venue with the seating set up for dinner it's a lot easier to turn a few chairs around than exclude more than half of your guest list and hurt people you obviously are close enough to to want them at some part of your wedding.

Tiered weddings are rude, no matter what ~local~ excuse you or anyone else may come up with. 

And you know it's rude, otherwise why would you even make a post. You're going to either try to defend it to deaf ears (trust me, we've heard all the ridiculous excuses as to why it's not rude. It is.) or you'll read a couple of responses just like mine and disappear because you didn't get the answer you were hoping for. Please, surprise me, do the right thing for your guests and treat them all equally. They'll appreciate it. 

LondonLisa

Yes, it's rude. A wedding is 1 event (ceremony and breakfast). Everyone must be invited to the ceremony and the breakfast. 

I also don't understand how it would take 2 hours to flip a room. They often have the tables ready to go and they just move it in during the champagne reception. How does your venue usually handle weddings? 

[Deleted User]

LondonLisa said:

Yes, it's rude. A wedding is 1 event (ceremony and breakfast). Everyone must be invited to the ceremony and the breakfast. 

I also don't understand how it would take 2 hours to flip a room. They often have the tables ready to go and they just move it in during the champagne reception. How does your venue usually handle weddings? 

It's a wedding reception not a backyard barbeque. So it is not just a case of laying out a few tables. Even table has to have the following items added:

1. Variety of cutlery
2. Plates, glassware.
3. Centre pieces
4. Napkins folded in a decorative way
5. Chairs moved
6. Bottles of wine/drinks placed on the table.
7. The Buffets stations would need to be set up
8. Linens need to be added
9. The equipment/tables for the cocktail hour need to be moved.

That takes time especially if you are doing that for 200 people. Maybe you had or are going to have more of a simple wedding and didn't require these things.

Then do you think if someone has a small registry office wedding they should only have the same number of guests for the whole thing?  

I think the venue makes people wait outside while they flip the room, but I don't want my guests to wait for ages.

[Deleted User]

InLoveInQueens said:

If you can't invite all your guests to both your ceremony and reception, you need to cut your guest list or find another venue, period. Your reception/breakfast/lunch/whatever it's called wherever you are is a thank you to your guests for witnessing your ceremony. Inviting guests just to the reception is rude and gift-grabby and makes them second tier, even if they still get a full reception, they're not invited to the full wedding. 

If your lunch venue isn't registered but would fit your guest list, find a similar venue that *is* registered or cut your guest list. Tiered weddings are rude, no matter what ~local~ excuse you or anyone else may come up with. 

And you know it's rude, otherwise why would you even make a post. You're going to either try to defend it to deaf ears (trust me, we've heard all the ridiculous excuses as to why it's not rude. It is.) or you'll read a couple of responses just like mine and disappear because you didn't get the answer you were hoping for. Please, surprise me, do the right thing for your guests and treat them all equally. They'll appreciate it. 

I posted because I am interested in the views of others. I don't see it as rude otherwise why would I consider doing it, obviously. People don't normally do things they purposely see as rude. I read many newspapers and opinions pieces that don't reflect my opinion all the time. It's called getting informed about the world around you and learning about other people. You don't see familiar with the idea.

You don't know me to say whether I could 'surprise' you or not. I'm sure there are excuses for tiered weddings - e.g. what if someone's venue (that housed everyone) suddenly burnt down two days before the wedding and the only one available for the ceremony is smaller. I know it is an outlandish idea but it debunks your idea that there is NEVER an excuse because disasters can happen. 

I didn't realise this site was so dogmatic - the world is filled with exceptions all the time. I just joined and have not read many posts on the Knot. I just thought it would be fun and make a nice change to the other sites I use - which seem to be a little more laid back.

Also how is it gift-grabby if you are paying for all the food and drink! You are still bearing the the burden of the biggest cost, which is the food and drink.

Also, isn't cutting the guest list also potentially rude? I have a large family and cutting some out would upset the ones who are cut. Either way, it appears that I (as the host) will come off rude.

[Deleted User]

The funny thing is I'm actually against the English tradition of 'evening guests,' (people that miss the lunch and the ceremony) because I think that is gift grabby. I wouldn't invite someone who I can't feed!  And I think turning up right at the end is wrong. To me if you can't feed someone you shouldn't invite them. One of the main reasons people go to weddings is the food and dancing.

I didn't see this as the same as evening guests since the extra 100+ guests are coming to the lunch as well. To me as long as the host is willing to be pay for my food and drink, I'm not offended as a guest. Clearly I'm the only one who feels this way.  

InLoveInQueens

The problem with that is a quick search would tell you everything you need to know about how people on this site, from different parts of the world, feel about tiered weddings. And that is that they are rude and to not do them. Yes, there are exceptions, if I was invited to a wedding and found out that their venue burned down and they had to have a much smaller reception and ended up doing immediate family and then took them all out to lunch, I'd send my card in the mail and wish them well. But that's not anything close to what you are proposing. 

I am very familiar with learning about others customs, but treating your guests equally and well isn't something regional, it's universal. Calling your reception a wedding breakfast while I go to a wedding dinner is regional, having a special dance or wearing kilts or doing henna is regional. Making sure your guests are happy and treated right should be the most default thing you could possibly do. 

Wedding websites like honeyfund and even the knot (besides the forum) are about upselling. They want to tell you it's ok to only invite 80 people to your ceremony and 200 to your reception because otherwise you'd only invite 80 to your reception and you'd spend less on food and linens and flowers, they're not looking out for your best interest. Your best interest is showing your guests how much they mean to you by inviting them to witness your special day and celebrate with you.

Your guests don't care about fancy napkins folded into intricate shapes or multiple kinds of utensils or flower arrangements, they care about you and your soon-to-be spouse. By excluding them from the part that actually makes your wedding a wedding you don't show much caring in return.

You say one of the main reasons people go to weddings is food and dancing, you're forgetting the actual main reason. The actual wedding. Anyone can host a party with food and dancing, people don't go to weddings for those reasons alone, that's not what makes weddings special. It's the witnessing of the vows that make them special. 

I edited my post because I misread originally, as you can see in your quote, if I was facing your choices I'd do everything in my power to either shorten the time spent flipping the room or have people seated for dinner already and have the ceremony there, it's been done by plenty of people here on TK and seeing as the alternative means excluding over half your guest list it seems superior in all ways. 

InLoveInQueens

Honestly, it doesn't matter to me what you end up doing, if you find the answers you want here or not, I only post in threads like this because I've been on the receiving end of invitations like yours and it hurt and soured my relationship with the couple/individual. it makes me sad to think of all the people who read articles about how to do what you're asking or go to echo chamber forums/get positive feedback from friends and family too afraid to share that they think it's rude or inappropriate and the relationships they're going to lose, either immediately or when it fizzles out after the guest sees where they rank among the other friends and family. I've also been not invited and it sucks not getting to celebrate, but it's a lot more all or nothing with events like this to avoid the possibility or ruining relationships.

You are obviously free to ignore everything I and everyone else says, but you posting means you see that some people will find it rude and maybe someone will say something that sparks a change of heart about your current plan. I am glad you say you don't like evening guests, I can't wait for that tradition to die, it's floating its way around certain circles here too, I have friends considering it and I've definitely made them not so keen on me by saying if you can't feed them you can't invite them

[Deleted User]

InLoveInQueens said:

The problem with that is a quick search would tell you everything you need to know about how people on this site, from different parts of the world, feel about tiered weddings. And that is that they are rude and to not do them. Yes, there are exceptions, if I was invited to a wedding and found out that their venue burned down and they had to have a much smaller reception and ended up doing immediate family and then took them all out to lunch, I'd send my card in the mail and wish them well. But that's not anything close to what you are proposing. 

I am very familiar with learning about others customs, but treating your guests equally and well isn't something regional, it's universal. Calling your reception a wedding breakfast while I go to a wedding dinner is regional, having a special dance or wearing kilts or doing henna is regional. Making sure your guests are happy and treated right should be the most default thing you could possibly do. 

Wedding websites like honeyfund and even the knot (besides the forum) are about upselling. They want to tell you it's ok to only invite 80 people to your ceremony and 200 to your reception because otherwise you'd only invite 80 to your reception and you'd spend less on food and linens and flowers, they're not looking out for your best interest. Your best interest is showing your guests how much they mean to you by inviting them to witness your special day and celebrate with you.

Your guests don't care about fancy napkins folded into intricate shapes or multiple kinds of utensils or flower arrangements, they care about you and your soon-to-be spouse. By excluding them from the part that actually makes your wedding a wedding you don't show much caring in return.

You say one of the main reasons people go to weddings is food and dancing, you're forgetting the actual main reason. The actual wedding. Anyone can host a party with food and dancing, people don't go to weddings for those reasons alone, that's not what makes weddings special. It's the witnessing of the vows that make them special. 

I edited my post because I misread originally, as you can see in your quote, if I was facing your choices I'd do everything in my power to either shorten the time spent flipping the room or have people seated for dinner already and have the ceremony there, it's been done by plenty of people here on TK and seeing as the alternative means excluding over half your guest list it seems superior in all ways. 

 But having the room set for dining is not conducive to watching a ceremony.  I think guests do actually care about napkins, venue etc. A wedding is an experience and having a room that's not decorated well undermines the experience and makes it less fun for guests. If you want guests to have a good time, simply watching a ceremony isn't enough. As a guest to other people's weddings, I feel taken care of if the B & G have taken the effort to make the place look good. It shows you care. Otherwise I would give them all plastic forks and paper plates.

TrixieJess

Knottie8f6a5db42e0a0a3d said:

LondonLisa said:

Yes, it's rude. A wedding is 1 event (ceremony and breakfast). Everyone must be invited to the ceremony and the breakfast. 

I also don't understand how it would take 2 hours to flip a room. They often have the tables ready to go and they just move it in during the champagne reception. How does your venue usually handle weddings? 

It's a wedding reception not a backyard barbeque. So it is not just a case of laying out a few tables. Even table has to have the following items added:

1. Variety of cutlery
2. Plates, glassware.
3. Centre pieces
4. Napkins folded in a decorative way
5. Chairs moved
6. Bottles of wine/drinks placed on the table.
7. The Buffets stations would need to be set up
8. Linens need to be added
9. The equipment/tables for the cocktail hour need to be moved.

That takes time especially if you are doing that for 200 people. Maybe you had or are going to have more of a simple wedding and didn't require these things.

Then do you think if someone has a small registry office wedding they should only have the same number of guests for the whole thing?  

I think the venue makes people wait outside while they flip the room, but I don't want my guests to wait for ages.

I used to work in catering. You can flip a room and set for 200 for a formal event in half an hour. You just have to have proper staff. You normally have a cocktail area set-up for guests with appetisers and drinks for your guests. Have you never been to a grown-up event?

LondonLisa

Knottie8f6a5db42e0a0a3d said:

LondonLisa said:

Yes, it's rude. A wedding is 1 event (ceremony and breakfast). Everyone must be invited to the ceremony and the breakfast. 

I also don't understand how it would take 2 hours to flip a room. They often have the tables ready to go and they just move it in during the champagne reception. How does your venue usually handle weddings? 

It's a wedding reception not a backyard barbeque. So it is not just a case of laying out a few tables. Even table has to have the following items added:

1. Variety of cutlery
2. Plates, glassware.
3. Centre pieces
4. Napkins folded in a decorative way
5. Chairs moved
6. Bottles of wine/drinks placed on the table.
7. The Buffets stations would need to be set up
8. Linens need to be added
9. The equipment/tables for the cocktail hour need to be moved.

That takes time especially if you are doing that for 200 people. Maybe you had or are going to have more of a simple wedding and didn't require these things.

Then do you think if someone has a small registry office wedding they should only have the same number of guests for the whole thing?  

I think the venue makes people wait outside while they flip the room, but I don't want my guests to wait for ages.

You completely misunderstood this. Most high-end venues will have the tables set up in a separate room, with the linens on, napkins folded, silverware and plates laid,  etc before the ceremony. Then they move the whole table in after the ceremony and just tidy it up and add the centrepieces and wine. It does not take 2 hours. My sister had 300 and they did it in 45 minutes at her venue. 

So how does your venue normally handle this? Venues do this all the time. 

Look, you chose a venue that doesn't suit your needs. Why did you not investigate a ceremony before you booked this in?

These are you options:
1. Talk to the venue and see if then can do it in 1 hour, during this time you have cocktails and canapés arranged for your guests in another part of your venue. 
2. Cut back on your centrepieces and decorative folded napkins, and pay for a separate ceremony space for all 200 people.
3. Have a small immediate family only (like 10 people max) registry office wedding and celebrate with everyone later. 
4. Find a whole new venue that can accommodate your ceremony and breakfast properly. 

This 80 person ceremony and 200 person party is just rude. 
 

charlotte989875

Knottie8f6a5db42e0a0a3d said:

InLoveInQueens said:

The problem with that is a quick search would tell you everything you need to know about how people on this site, from different parts of the world, feel about tiered weddings. And that is that they are rude and to not do them. Yes, there are exceptions, if I was invited to a wedding and found out that their venue burned down and they had to have a much smaller reception and ended up doing immediate family and then took them all out to lunch, I'd send my card in the mail and wish them well. But that's not anything close to what you are proposing. 

I am very familiar with learning about others customs, but treating your guests equally and well isn't something regional, it's universal. Calling your reception a wedding breakfast while I go to a wedding dinner is regional, having a special dance or wearing kilts or doing henna is regional. Making sure your guests are happy and treated right should be the most default thing you could possibly do. 

Wedding websites like honeyfund and even the knot (besides the forum) are about upselling. They want to tell you it's ok to only invite 80 people to your ceremony and 200 to your reception because otherwise you'd only invite 80 to your reception and you'd spend less on food and linens and flowers, they're not looking out for your best interest. Your best interest is showing your guests how much they mean to you by inviting them to witness your special day and celebrate with you.

Your guests don't care about fancy napkins folded into intricate shapes or multiple kinds of utensils or flower arrangements, they care about you and your soon-to-be spouse. By excluding them from the part that actually makes your wedding a wedding you don't show much caring in return.

You say one of the main reasons people go to weddings is food and dancing, you're forgetting the actual main reason. The actual wedding. Anyone can host a party with food and dancing, people don't go to weddings for those reasons alone, that's not what makes weddings special. It's the witnessing of the vows that make them special. 

I edited my post because I misread originally, as you can see in your quote, if I was facing your choices I'd do everything in my power to either shorten the time spent flipping the room or have people seated for dinner already and have the ceremony there, it's been done by plenty of people here on TK and seeing as the alternative means excluding over half your guest list it seems superior in all ways. 

 But having the room set for dining is not conducive to watching a ceremony.  I think guests do actually care about napkins, venue etc. A wedding is an experience and having a room that's not decorated well undermines the experience and makes it less fun for guests. If you want guests to have a good time, simply watching a ceremony isn't enough. As a guest to other people's weddings, I feel taken care of if the B & G have taken the effort to make the place look good. It shows you care. Otherwise I would give them all plastic forks and paper plates.

Yes decor is part of the experience. However not one that justifies not inviting guests to your ceremony. If I was invited to a reception but not the ceremony I would likely decline. Yes dinner and dancing is fun, but it's fun because it's a big thank you and celebration of the wedding you just witnessed. It would say to me that I was good enough of a friend/family member to actually see your vows, but I could come and party later. A wedding+reception is one event and it's rude to invite someone to only part of an event, regardless if that part is the "fun, more expensive" part. 

[Deleted User]

LondonLisa said:

Knottie8f6a5db42e0a0a3d said:

LondonLisa said:

Yes, it's rude. A wedding is 1 event (ceremony and breakfast). Everyone must be invited to the ceremony and the breakfast. 

I also don't understand how it would take 2 hours to flip a room. They often have the tables ready to go and they just move it in during the champagne reception. How does your venue usually handle weddings? 

It's a wedding reception not a backyard barbeque. So it is not just a case of laying out a few tables. Even table has to have the following items added:

1. Variety of cutlery
2. Plates, glassware.
3. Centre pieces
4. Napkins folded in a decorative way
5. Chairs moved
6. Bottles of wine/drinks placed on the table.
7. The Buffets stations would need to be set up
8. Linens need to be added
9. The equipment/tables for the cocktail hour need to be moved.

That takes time especially if you are doing that for 200 people. Maybe you had or are going to have more of a simple wedding and didn't require these things.

Then do you think if someone has a small registry office wedding they should only have the same number of guests for the whole thing?  

I think the venue makes people wait outside while they flip the room, but I don't want my guests to wait for ages.

You completely misunderstood this. Most high-end venues will have the tables set up in a separate room, with the linens on, napkins folded, silverware and plates laid,  etc before the ceremony. Then they move the whole table in after the ceremony and just tidy it up and add the centrepieces and wine. It does not take 2 hours. My sister had 300 and they did it in 45 minutes at her venue. 

So how does your venue normally handle this? Venues do this all the time. 

Look, you chose a venue that doesn't suit your needs. Why did you not investigate a ceremony before you booked this in?

These are you options:
1. Talk to the venue and see if then can do it in 1 hour, during this time you have cocktails and canapés arranged for your guests in another part of your venue. 
2. Cut back on your centrepieces and decorative folded napkins, and pay for a separate ceremony space for all 200 people.
3. Have a small immediate family only (like 10 people max) registry office wedding and celebrate with everyone later. 
4. Find a whole new venue that can accommodate your ceremony and breakfast properly. 

This 80 person ceremony and 200 person party is just rude. 
 

 I never considered having the ceremony there because my family would look down on the idea of having a ceremony where you were about to eat, with pre-laid tables!

It would be considered weird and really cheap. They would not consider it the proper thing to do, so it never occurred to me as an option.

You say most 'high end venues,' but that again depends on the size of the venue, not necessarily how much it costs. It would require a venue to have an entirely separate room large enough to have 200+ pre laid tables, which this venue doesn't. The price of the venue has nothing to do with it (which is expensive btw). I thought about doing a separate ceremony space, but my mum was so horrified by the idea, I decided against it. She says her family will 'talk' and not in a good way.  

BTW, I haven't actually booked it yet. Just eyeing up the one I want because getting venues for that many people that allow you to bring in your own caterers is very difficult! Most places make you use from a specified list. I want caribbean caterers, and most wedding venues focus on catering to the needs of the white/British population (for obvious reasons), but i find most places that cater to the indigenous population produce bland/tasteless food.

[Deleted User]

TrixieJess said:

Knottie8f6a5db42e0a0a3d said:

LondonLisa said:

Yes, it's rude. A wedding is 1 event (ceremony and breakfast). Everyone must be invited to the ceremony and the breakfast. 

I also don't understand how it would take 2 hours to flip a room. They often have the tables ready to go and they just move it in during the champagne reception. How does your venue usually handle weddings? 

It's a wedding reception not a backyard barbeque. So it is not just a case of laying out a few tables. Even table has to have the following items added:

1. Variety of cutlery
2. Plates, glassware.
3. Centre pieces
4. Napkins folded in a decorative way
5. Chairs moved
6. Bottles of wine/drinks placed on the table.
7. The Buffets stations would need to be set up
8. Linens need to be added
9. The equipment/tables for the cocktail hour need to be moved.

That takes time especially if you are doing that for 200 people. Maybe you had or are going to have more of a simple wedding and didn't require these things.

Then do you think if someone has a small registry office wedding they should only have the same number of guests for the whole thing?  

I think the venue makes people wait outside while they flip the room, but I don't want my guests to wait for ages.

I used to work in catering. You can flip a room and set for 200 for a formal event in half an hour. You just have to have proper staff. You normally have a cocktail area set-up for guests with appetisers and drinks for your guests. Have you never been to a grown-up event?



I've been to many grown-up events. I think its interesting you are lecturing me on etiquette by being very rude! lol.  Not sure what kids parties you were catering.

I'm not going to hire an entirely new fleet of staff simply to flip a room!  There is such a thing as a wedding budget. I've got enough waiters, barman and servers so everyone is comfortable during the meal.  

LondonLisa

Knottie8f6a5db42e0a0a3d said:

LondonLisa said:

Knottie8f6a5db42e0a0a3d said:

LondonLisa said:

Yes, it's rude. A wedding is 1 event (ceremony and breakfast). Everyone must be invited to the ceremony and the breakfast. 

I also don't understand how it would take 2 hours to flip a room. They often have the tables ready to go and they just move it in during the champagne reception. How does your venue usually handle weddings? 

It's a wedding reception not a backyard barbeque. So it is not just a case of laying out a few tables. Even table has to have the following items added:

1. Variety of cutlery
2. Plates, glassware.
3. Centre pieces
4. Napkins folded in a decorative way
5. Chairs moved
6. Bottles of wine/drinks placed on the table.
7. The Buffets stations would need to be set up
8. Linens need to be added
9. The equipment/tables for the cocktail hour need to be moved.

That takes time especially if you are doing that for 200 people. Maybe you had or are going to have more of a simple wedding and didn't require these things.

Then do you think if someone has a small registry office wedding they should only have the same number of guests for the whole thing?  

I think the venue makes people wait outside while they flip the room, but I don't want my guests to wait for ages.

You completely misunderstood this. Most high-end venues will have the tables set up in a separate room, with the linens on, napkins folded, silverware and plates laid,  etc before the ceremony. Then they move the whole table in after the ceremony and just tidy it up and add the centrepieces and wine. It does not take 2 hours. My sister had 300 and they did it in 45 minutes at her venue. 

So how does your venue normally handle this? Venues do this all the time. 

Look, you chose a venue that doesn't suit your needs. Why did you not investigate a ceremony before you booked this in?

These are you options:
1. Talk to the venue and see if then can do it in 1 hour, during this time you have cocktails and canapés arranged for your guests in another part of your venue. 
2. Cut back on your centrepieces and decorative folded napkins, and pay for a separate ceremony space for all 200 people.
3. Have a small immediate family only (like 10 people max) registry office wedding and celebrate with everyone later. 
4. Find a whole new venue that can accommodate your ceremony and breakfast properly. 

This 80 person ceremony and 200 person party is just rude. 
 

 I never considered having the ceremony there because my family would look down on the idea of having a ceremony where you were about to eat, with pre-laid tables!

It would be considered weird and really cheap. They would not consider it the proper thing to do, so it never occurred to me as an option.

You say most 'high end venues,' but that again depends on the size of the venue, not necessarily how much it costs. It would require a venue to have an entirely separate room large enough to have 200+ pre laid tables, which this venue doesn't. The price of the venue has nothing to do with it (which is expensive btw). I thought about doing a separate ceremony space, but my mum was so horrified by the idea, I decided against it. She says her family will 'talk' and not in a good way.  

BTW, I haven't actually booked it yet. Just eyeing up the one I want because getting venues for that many people that allow you to bring in your own caterers is very difficult! Most places make you use from a specified list.

This venue doesn't suit your needs. Don't book it. Everyone on here can tell stories about how they fell in love with a venue but couldn't use it because of space or a myriad of other reasons. Do you have to use your own catering? That will open up a lot more options. 

[Deleted User]

LondonLisa said:

Knottie8f6a5db42e0a0a3d said:

LondonLisa said:

Knottie8f6a5db42e0a0a3d said:

LondonLisa said:

Yes, it's rude. A wedding is 1 event (ceremony and breakfast). Everyone must be invited to the ceremony and the breakfast. 

I also don't understand how it would take 2 hours to flip a room. They often have the tables ready to go and they just move it in during the champagne reception. How does your venue usually handle weddings? 

It's a wedding reception not a backyard barbeque. So it is not just a case of laying out a few tables. Even table has to have the following items added:

1. Variety of cutlery
2. Plates, glassware.
3. Centre pieces
4. Napkins folded in a decorative way
5. Chairs moved
6. Bottles of wine/drinks placed on the table.
7. The Buffets stations would need to be set up
8. Linens need to be added
9. The equipment/tables for the cocktail hour need to be moved.

That takes time especially if you are doing that for 200 people. Maybe you had or are going to have more of a simple wedding and didn't require these things.

Then do you think if someone has a small registry office wedding they should only have the same number of guests for the whole thing?  

I think the venue makes people wait outside while they flip the room, but I don't want my guests to wait for ages.

You completely misunderstood this. Most high-end venues will have the tables set up in a separate room, with the linens on, napkins folded, silverware and plates laid,  etc before the ceremony. Then they move the whole table in after the ceremony and just tidy it up and add the centrepieces and wine. It does not take 2 hours. My sister had 300 and they did it in 45 minutes at her venue. 

So how does your venue normally handle this? Venues do this all the time. 

Look, you chose a venue that doesn't suit your needs. Why did you not investigate a ceremony before you booked this in?

These are you options:
1. Talk to the venue and see if then can do it in 1 hour, during this time you have cocktails and canapés arranged for your guests in another part of your venue. 
2. Cut back on your centrepieces and decorative folded napkins, and pay for a separate ceremony space for all 200 people.
3. Have a small immediate family only (like 10 people max) registry office wedding and celebrate with everyone later. 
4. Find a whole new venue that can accommodate your ceremony and breakfast properly. 

This 80 person ceremony and 200 person party is just rude. 
 

 I never considered having the ceremony there because my family would look down on the idea of having a ceremony where you were about to eat, with pre-laid tables!

It would be considered weird and really cheap. They would not consider it the proper thing to do, so it never occurred to me as an option.

You say most 'high end venues,' but that again depends on the size of the venue, not necessarily how much it costs. It would require a venue to have an entirely separate room large enough to have 200+ pre laid tables, which this venue doesn't. The price of the venue has nothing to do with it (which is expensive btw). I thought about doing a separate ceremony space, but my mum was so horrified by the idea, I decided against it. She says her family will 'talk' and not in a good way.  

BTW, I haven't actually booked it yet. Just eyeing up the one I want because getting venues for that many people that allow you to bring in your own caterers is very difficult! Most places make you use from a specified list.

This venue doesn't suit your needs. Don't book it. Everyone on here can tell stories about how they fell in love with a venue but couldn't use it because of space or a myriad of other reasons. Do you have to use your own catering? That will open up a lot more options. 

 To have a wedding I need a place that allows me to bring in my own caterers, so options are limited. If I use most normal wedding venues, my family will probably hate the food (so would I) because most English chefs don't cook in a way that is suitable to our tastes. Bad food ruins a venue, so I need a venue that fits 200+ people, allows external caterers and has no corkage charge to allow me to provide free drinks for the guests all night long.

Most wedding venues also make it very difficult to have an open bar because either their corkage charge is very prohibitive (I've been quoted £20 a bottle) or they stick you with a drinks package that limits each guest to about 3 drinks, followed by a cash bar. I don't want to do that. 

Also, in our culture it is normal for some guests to bring extra people, so I need to have a buffet to allow me to cater to any additional people who may rock up unexpectedly.  So silver service is not really doable.  

I don't want to waste money on a day I don't like and in our culture food is very important. Having's our culture's food is me taking care of my guests. The focus on this site appears to be about making guests comfortable and happy. If I didn't care I would feed them English food.

[Deleted User]

InLoveInQueens said:

Honestly, it doesn't matter to me what you end up doing, if you find the answers you want here or not, I only post in threads like this because I've been on the receiving end of invitations like yours and it hurt and soured my relationship with the couple/individual. it makes me sad to think of all the people who read articles about how to do what you're asking or go to echo chamber forums/get positive feedback from friends and family too afraid to share that they think it's rude or inappropriate and the relationships they're going to lose, either immediately or when it fizzles out after the guest sees where they rank among the other friends and family. I've also been not invited and it sucks not getting to celebrate, but it's a lot more all or nothing with events like this to avoid the possibility or ruining relationships.

You are obviously free to ignore everything I and everyone else says, but you posting means you see that some people will find it rude and maybe someone will say something that sparks a change of heart about your current plan. I am glad you say you don't like evening guests, I can't wait for that tradition to die, it's floating its way around certain circles here too, I have friends considering it and I've definitely made them not so keen on me by saying if you can't feed them you can't invite them

My fiance is white and English and I think it is common amongst the white British community to have evening guests. I spoke to my wedding planners and they say there is a bit of a cultural split. They said white english people will often do evening guests while black/asian/indian weddings will not do it because it is seen as rude.

Not having evening guests, was one of the few things I really cared about. I also talked him into having Samba and capoeira dancers - which he initially thought we inappropriate for a reception. I think its awesome!

charlotte989875

Knottie8f6a5db42e0a0a3d said:

InLoveInQueens said:

Honestly, it doesn't matter to me what you end up doing, if you find the answers you want here or not, I only post in threads like this because I've been on the receiving end of invitations like yours and it hurt and soured my relationship with the couple/individual. it makes me sad to think of all the people who read articles about how to do what you're asking or go to echo chamber forums/get positive feedback from friends and family too afraid to share that they think it's rude or inappropriate and the relationships they're going to lose, either immediately or when it fizzles out after the guest sees where they rank among the other friends and family. I've also been not invited and it sucks not getting to celebrate, but it's a lot more all or nothing with events like this to avoid the possibility or ruining relationships.

You are obviously free to ignore everything I and everyone else says, but you posting means you see that some people will find it rude and maybe someone will say something that sparks a change of heart about your current plan. I am glad you say you don't like evening guests, I can't wait for that tradition to die, it's floating its way around certain circles here too, I have friends considering it and I've definitely made them not so keen on me by saying if you can't feed them you can't invite them

My fiance is white and English and I think it is common amongst the white British community to have evening guests. I spoke to my wedding planners and they say there is a bit of a cultural split. They said white english people will often do evening guests while black/asian/indian weddings will not do it because it is seen as rude.

Not having evening guests, was one of the few things I really cared about. I also talked him into having Samba and capoeira dancers - which he initially thought we inappropriate for a reception. I think its awesome!

So you're willing to hire dancers, but other suggestions that would cut down on the time to flip a room is extravagant? You're priorities are way out of order here. It sounds like you want a high end wedding at a budget price, and things don't work that way. Prioritize your guests comfort (including them in all parts of the event is a necessity to ensuring their comfort) over all else, including decor and dancers. 

Are your parents paying for the wedding? They seem to have a lot of input on what is acceptable or not for your wedding. 

LondonLisa

So if you are set on this venue, what are your options for 200 person ceremony venue? Are there any nearby registered spaces? Can you put up a marquee at this venue and have the party in there and the ceremony inside? 

 Where are you located? 

I agree that evening guests are really rude. 

LD1970

Knottie8f6a5db42e0a0a3d said:

LondonLisa said:

Knottie8f6a5db42e0a0a3d said:

LondonLisa said:

Yes, it's rude. A wedding is 1 event (ceremony and breakfast). Everyone must be invited to the ceremony and the breakfast. 

I also don't understand how it would take 2 hours to flip a room. They often have the tables ready to go and they just move it in during the champagne reception. How does your venue usually handle weddings? 

It's a wedding reception not a backyard barbeque. So it is not just a case of laying out a few tables. Even table has to have the following items added:

1. Variety of cutlery
2. Plates, glassware.
3. Centre pieces
4. Napkins folded in a decorative way
5. Chairs moved
6. Bottles of wine/drinks placed on the table.
7. The Buffets stations would need to be set up
8. Linens need to be added
9. The equipment/tables for the cocktail hour need to be moved.

That takes time especially if you are doing that for 200 people. Maybe you had or are going to have more of a simple wedding and didn't require these things.

Then do you think if someone has a small registry office wedding they should only have the same number of guests for the whole thing?  

I think the venue makes people wait outside while they flip the room, but I don't want my guests to wait for ages.

You completely misunderstood this. Most high-end venues will have the tables set up in a separate room, with the linens on, napkins folded, silverware and plates laid,  etc before the ceremony. Then they move the whole table in after the ceremony and just tidy it up and add the centrepieces and wine. It does not take 2 hours. My sister had 300 and they did it in 45 minutes at her venue. 

So how does your venue normally handle this? Venues do this all the time. 

Look, you chose a venue that doesn't suit your needs. Why did you not investigate a ceremony before you booked this in?

These are you options:
1. Talk to the venue and see if then can do it in 1 hour, during this time you have cocktails and canapés arranged for your guests in another part of your venue. 
2. Cut back on your centrepieces and decorative folded napkins, and pay for a separate ceremony space for all 200 people.
3. Have a small immediate family only (like 10 people max) registry office wedding and celebrate with everyone later. 
4. Find a whole new venue that can accommodate your ceremony and breakfast properly. 

This 80 person ceremony and 200 person party is just rude. 
 

 I never considered having the ceremony there because my family would look down on the idea of having a ceremony where you were about to eat, with pre-laid tables!

It would be considered weird and really cheap. They would not consider it the proper thing to do, so it never occurred to me as an option.

You say most 'high end venues,' but that again depends on the size of the venue, not necessarily how much it costs. It would require a venue to have an entirely separate room large enough to have 200+ pre laid tables, which this venue doesn't. The price of the venue has nothing to do with it (which is expensive btw). I thought about doing a separate ceremony space, but my mum was so horrified by the idea, I decided against it. She says her family will 'talk' and not in a good way.  

BTW, I haven't actually booked it yet. Just eyeing up the one I want because getting venues for that many people that allow you to bring in your own caterers is very difficult! Most places make you use from a specified list. I want caribbean caterers, and most wedding venues focus on catering to the needs of the white/British population (for obvious reasons), but i find most places that cater to the indigenous population produce bland/tasteless food.

You don't need 200 tables for 200 guests.

[Deleted User]

charlotte989875 said:

Knottie8f6a5db42e0a0a3d said:

InLoveInQueens said:

Honestly, it doesn't matter to me what you end up doing, if you find the answers you want here or not, I only post in threads like this because I've been on the receiving end of invitations like yours and it hurt and soured my relationship with the couple/individual. it makes me sad to think of all the people who read articles about how to do what you're asking or go to echo chamber forums/get positive feedback from friends and family too afraid to share that they think it's rude or inappropriate and the relationships they're going to lose, either immediately or when it fizzles out after the guest sees where they rank among the other friends and family. I've also been not invited and it sucks not getting to celebrate, but it's a lot more all or nothing with events like this to avoid the possibility or ruining relationships.

You are obviously free to ignore everything I and everyone else says, but you posting means you see that some people will find it rude and maybe someone will say something that sparks a change of heart about your current plan. I am glad you say you don't like evening guests, I can't wait for that tradition to die, it's floating its way around certain circles here too, I have friends considering it and I've definitely made them not so keen on me by saying if you can't feed them you can't invite them

My fiance is white and English and I think it is common amongst the white British community to have evening guests. I spoke to my wedding planners and they say there is a bit of a cultural split. They said white english people will often do evening guests while black/asian/indian weddings will not do it because it is seen as rude.

Not having evening guests, was one of the few things I really cared about. I also talked him into having Samba and capoeira dancers - which he initially thought we inappropriate for a reception. I think its awesome!

So you're willing to hire dancers, but other suggestions that would cut down on the time to flip a room is extravagant? You're priorities are way out of order here. It sounds like you want a high end wedding at a budget price, and things don't work that way. Prioritize your guests comfort (including them in all parts of the event is a necessity to ensuring their comfort) over all else, including decor and dancers. 

Are your parents paying for the wedding? They seem to have a lot of input on what is acceptable or not for your wedding. 

Feeding 200+ is hardly budget. If you think that many people is budget you are either a multi-millionaire, or a bit dense. If I wanted budget I would have 10 guests.  My parents are paying for the entertainment, not me. It's their gift to me.  My partner and I are paying for everything else. 

Finding venues that can house 200 people for a ceremony is difficult and as I said, my family looks down on the idea of having it in the same place.

[Deleted User]

LD1970 said:

Knottie8f6a5db42e0a0a3d said:

LondonLisa said:

Knottie8f6a5db42e0a0a3d said:

LondonLisa said:

Yes, it's rude. A wedding is 1 event (ceremony and breakfast). Everyone must be invited to the ceremony and the breakfast. 

I also don't understand how it would take 2 hours to flip a room. They often have the tables ready to go and they just move it in during the champagne reception. How does your venue usually handle weddings? 

It's a wedding reception not a backyard barbeque. So it is not just a case of laying out a few tables. Even table has to have the following items added:

1. Variety of cutlery
2. Plates, glassware.
3. Centre pieces
4. Napkins folded in a decorative way
5. Chairs moved
6. Bottles of wine/drinks placed on the table.
7. The Buffets stations would need to be set up
8. Linens need to be added
9. The equipment/tables for the cocktail hour need to be moved.

That takes time especially if you are doing that for 200 people. Maybe you had or are going to have more of a simple wedding and didn't require these things.

Then do you think if someone has a small registry office wedding they should only have the same number of guests for the whole thing?  

I think the venue makes people wait outside while they flip the room, but I don't want my guests to wait for ages.

You completely misunderstood this. Most high-end venues will have the tables set up in a separate room, with the linens on, napkins folded, silverware and plates laid,  etc before the ceremony. Then they move the whole table in after the ceremony and just tidy it up and add the centrepieces and wine. It does not take 2 hours. My sister had 300 and they did it in 45 minutes at her venue. 

So how does your venue normally handle this? Venues do this all the time. 

Look, you chose a venue that doesn't suit your needs. Why did you not investigate a ceremony before you booked this in?

These are you options:
1. Talk to the venue and see if then can do it in 1 hour, during this time you have cocktails and canapés arranged for your guests in another part of your venue. 
2. Cut back on your centrepieces and decorative folded napkins, and pay for a separate ceremony space for all 200 people.
3. Have a small immediate family only (like 10 people max) registry office wedding and celebrate with everyone later. 
4. Find a whole new venue that can accommodate your ceremony and breakfast properly. 

This 80 person ceremony and 200 person party is just rude. 
 

 I never considered having the ceremony there because my family would look down on the idea of having a ceremony where you were about to eat, with pre-laid tables!

It would be considered weird and really cheap. They would not consider it the proper thing to do, so it never occurred to me as an option.

You say most 'high end venues,' but that again depends on the size of the venue, not necessarily how much it costs. It would require a venue to have an entirely separate room large enough to have 200+ pre laid tables, which this venue doesn't. The price of the venue has nothing to do with it (which is expensive btw). I thought about doing a separate ceremony space, but my mum was so horrified by the idea, I decided against it. She says her family will 'talk' and not in a good way.  

BTW, I haven't actually booked it yet. Just eyeing up the one I want because getting venues for that many people that allow you to bring in your own caterers is very difficult! Most places make you use from a specified list. I want caribbean caterers, and most wedding venues focus on catering to the needs of the white/British population (for obvious reasons), but i find most places that cater to the indigenous population produce bland/tasteless food.

You don't need 200 tables for 200 guests.

I meant tables enough for 200 guests, obviously.......

[Deleted User]

LondonLisa said:

So if you are set on this venue, what are your options for 200 person ceremony venue? Are there any nearby registered spaces? Can you put up a marquee at this venue and have the party in there and the ceremony inside? 

 Where are you located? 

I agree that evening guests are really rude. 

London.  Most of my friends and family live there, so I want to make it easy for them. Also to make it easier for my guests I picked a large venue that is somewhat close to where they live. I've looked all over London and not many venues fulfil my requirements. It's mainly venues for asian weddings I look at because they have enormous weddings. The largest town hall I found fits 160.

redoryx

I attended a wedding a couple of years ago where we were seated at the dining tables which, yes, were all set for us to eat immediately following the ceremony which we watched from our dinner tables.

To this day it is still, 100%, my favorite wedding set up I've gone to. Not once did I think it made the couple "weird" or "cheap"

justsie

redoryx said:

I attended a wedding a couple of years ago where we were seated at the dining tables which, yes, were all set for us to eat immediately following the ceremony which we watched from our dinner tables.

To this day it is still, 100%, my favorite wedding set up I've gone to. Not once did I think it made the couple "weird" or "cheap"

I attended one last year as well. I'll be disappointed to have to tell my family that their nuptials are invalid because we sat at our tables during the service this year when I see them at Thanksgiving. 

[Deleted User]

justsie said:

redoryx said:

I attended a wedding a couple of years ago where we were seated at the dining tables which, yes, were all set for us to eat immediately following the ceremony which we watched from our dinner tables.

To this day it is still, 100%, my favorite wedding set up I've gone to. Not once did I think it made the couple "weird" or "cheap"

I attended one last year as well. I'll be disappointed to have to tell my family that their nuptials are invalid because we sat at our tables during the service this year when I see them at Thanksgiving. 

Who said that sitting at tables makes nuptials invalid. It's just less good. There is a difference.

justsie

Knottie8f6a5db42e0a0a3d said:

justsie said:

redoryx said:

I attended a wedding a couple of years ago where we were seated at the dining tables which, yes, were all set for us to eat immediately following the ceremony which we watched from our dinner tables.

To this day it is still, 100%, my favorite wedding set up I've gone to. Not once did I think it made the couple "weird" or "cheap"

I attended one last year as well. I'll be disappointed to have to tell my family that their nuptials are invalid because we sat at our tables during the service this year when I see them at Thanksgiving. 

Who said that sitting at tables makes nuptials invalid. It's just less good. There is a difference.

I just love the fact that we are the rude ones.