Filling a gap

grumbledore

I would strongly consider moving something if you can to make this more convenient for your guests. Our reception venue is literally a less than one minute walk from our ceremony venue. Granted this is on the extreme side for separate venues, but I guarantee our guests will be thrilled.

jenna8984

So I have a question that seems obvious to me but no one has brought it up yet.......can you host cocktail hour in the church hall? I've never been to a church that didn't have a function room.

Also, don't be tricked into thinking you NEED to end at 10-11pm just because that's typical. Mine is ending at 8pm and I'm perfectly cool with that, most people will go home and maybe a handful will go out together. I've already hosted them for 6.5 hours and my job is done, I don't need to host them until 11pm because they feel like staying up later. If my couple of out of towners want to go out I'm sure they'll ask me or others at the reception for suggestions and not just go wandering to any old bar. My parents and grandparents are so excited because they hate eating dinner late and being out late. And I'm excited to end early because I'll get a few hours alone to just bask with my husband and enjoy our wedding night without being so pooped and immediately going to sleep. So my vote is just change it to 4-9.

 

carliealissa

I'm going to go ahead and vote for going with what feels right/nicest to you.  As someone who is not old or crabby, I personally would enjoy what you are trying to do.  It could even turn out to be the nicest part of the evening. As long as there are drinks and guests to talk to, it will be fun. Someone mentioned that particularly as an OOT guest, they would want to do as little as possible and not go anywhere other than the reception.. that makes no sense to me.  When traveling somewhere, especially for a wedding which is usually a very short trip and expensive flight, you want to make the absolute most out of your visit.

 I would recommend carefully planning out your logistics- hiring shuttles for example, because that would be one major annoyance if people had to drive themselves all over.  You come across as being concerned about your guests enjoyment though and wanting to host them, it's not like you're just going to point to the water and tell them that they have 2 hours to kill.  So I'm sure whatever you come up with will be lovely.

Maggie0829

carliealissa said:

I'm going to go ahead and vote for going with what feels right/nicest to you.  As someone who is not old or crabby, I personally would enjoy what you are trying to do.  It could even turn out to be the nicest part of the evening. As long as there are drinks and guests to talk to, it will be fun. Someone mentioned that particularly as an OOT guest, they would want to do as little as possible and not go anywhere other than the reception.. that makes no sense to me.  When traveling somewhere, especially for a wedding which is usually a very short trip and expensive flight, you want to make the absolute most out of your visit.

 I would recommend carefully planning out your logistics- hiring shuttles for example, because that would be one major annoyance if people had to drive themselves all over.  You come across as being concerned about your guests enjoyment though and wanting to host them, it's not like you're just going to point to the water and tell them that they have 2 hours to kill.  So I'm sure whatever you come up with will be lovely.

But having your guests have to go to three different locations can get highly confusing and irritating for your guests.  They all have to be aware of the time and figure out ways to get from one place to another.  Having your ceremony and then reception right afterwards is so much easier then this in between crap.

And when I travel I do like to see the area I am in, but typically when I travel for a wedding I am travelling there, not because of the destination it is located in, but because of the couple.  If I want to see the area where the wedding is taking place I can do that myself and not have someone dictate what I should be doing in between the ceremony and the reception because they can't seem to plan a wedding without a gap.

mrsbanany

Maggie0829 said:

carliealissa said:

I'm going to go ahead and vote for going with what feels right/nicest to you.  As someone who is not old or crabby, I personally would enjoy what you are trying to do.  It could even turn out to be the nicest part of the evening. As long as there are drinks and guests to talk to, it will be fun. Someone mentioned that particularly as an OOT guest, they would want to do as little as possible and not go anywhere other than the reception.. that makes no sense to me.  When traveling somewhere, especially for a wedding which is usually a very short trip and expensive flight, you want to make the absolute most out of your visit.

 I would recommend carefully planning out your logistics- hiring shuttles for example, because that would be one major annoyance if people had to drive themselves all over.  You come across as being concerned about your guests enjoyment though and wanting to host them, it's not like you're just going to point to the water and tell them that they have 2 hours to kill.  So I'm sure whatever you come up with will be lovely.

But having your guests have to go to three different locations can get highly confusing and irritating for your guests.  They all have to be aware of the time and figure out ways to get from one place to another.  Having your ceremony and then reception right afterwards is so much easier then this in between crap.

And when I travel I do like to see the area I am in, but typically when I travel for a wedding I am travelling there, not because of the destination it is located in, but because of the couple.  If I want to see the area where the wedding is taking place I can do that myself and not have someone dictate what I should be doing in between the ceremony and the reception because they can't seem to plan a wedding without a gap.

I totally get what everyone is saying here and it all does make sense. However, I don't think I am planning with a gap if I am coming up with something so that people are not wandering around for 2 hours with nothing to do. In my opinion a gap is when you get married, say see you later to your guests and show up at a reception hours later. We aren't saying see you later we are saying "we understand that there is sometime before the reception here is a place that you can go on us."  I also don't like the word dictate. I am not telling anyone that they have to do anything, they are invited to a ceremony, a reception and a gathering before the reception. They are invited to everything, whether they participate or not is up to them. We are having a first dance that they can watch or not watch. I am not making an announcement telling everyone to stand up and stare at me for 3 minutes just like I am not making an announcement that they all have to be at a certain place at a certain time.  Like everyone is saying, they are adults and they can choose if they are going to participate in the provided activities if they wish. 

The point is, we would never leave our guests without something do to. We want to make sure they are happy without breaking the bank. I called my venue and it would be an additional 7k to provide them with food and drinks and the time at the reception venue.  We have the venue until 10:30 and we cannot change that time in the contract but we can add time to it. It is cheaper to host our guests elsewhere before the reception.  I want them to be happy without breaking the bank. I went out and got quotes and it would cost us approx 4k for transportation and open bar at a local restaurant.  If transportation were provided would that make things better for people? A big concern for people was that they don't want to be watching the clock. If I made it so people can enjoy themselves and we will watch the clock for them does that make it better?   We considered getting a shuttle to my beach house and my grandparents said they would host people there for the time in between.  I feel like myself, as a guest, would not mind as long as there was food, drinks and something to do regardless of how the couple did it.  

PrettyGirlLost

carliealissa said:

I'm going to go ahead and vote for going with what feels right/nicest to you.  As someone who is not old or crabby, I personally would enjoy what you are trying to do.  It could even turn out to be the nicest part of the evening. As long as there are drinks and guests to talk to, it will be fun. Someone mentioned that particularly as an OOT guest, they would want to do as little as possible and not go anywhere other than the reception.. that makes no sense to me.  When traveling somewhere, especially for a wedding which is usually a very short trip and expensive flight, you want to make the absolute most out of your visit.

 I would recommend carefully planning out your logistics- hiring shuttles for example, because that would be one major annoyance if people had to drive themselves all over.  You come across as being concerned about your guests enjoyment though and wanting to host them, it's not like you're just going to point to the water and tell them that they have 2 hours to kill.  So I'm sure whatever you come up with will be lovely.

Way to be passive aggressive.  Just because I don't like some of what the OP is proposing does not make me old or crabby, sheesh. 

I'm the one who said that when I travel to an OOT wedding my only intent is to go to the wedding, and that's just how I feel.  I usually only fly or drive in the night before the wedding and then leave the next day, because I'm only going for the wedding, I'm not going on vacation and I'm saving vacation time for other trips. 

When I go somewhere for a vacation I go for several days or more because I like to be able to take my time and enjoy the area.  I don't enjoy rushing around a place just because I am there.  And I don't like clock watching if I am supposed to be enjoying something, which is what will happen if I am trying to kill time between the ceremony and the reception.

Maggie0829

amandaj424 said:

Maggie0829 said:

carliealissa said:

I'm going to go ahead and vote for going with what feels right/nicest to you.  As someone who is not old or crabby, I personally would enjoy what you are trying to do.  It could even turn out to be the nicest part of the evening. As long as there are drinks and guests to talk to, it will be fun. Someone mentioned that particularly as an OOT guest, they would want to do as little as possible and not go anywhere other than the reception.. that makes no sense to me.  When traveling somewhere, especially for a wedding which is usually a very short trip and expensive flight, you want to make the absolute most out of your visit.

 I would recommend carefully planning out your logistics- hiring shuttles for example, because that would be one major annoyance if people had to drive themselves all over.  You come across as being concerned about your guests enjoyment though and wanting to host them, it's not like you're just going to point to the water and tell them that they have 2 hours to kill.  So I'm sure whatever you come up with will be lovely.

But having your guests have to go to three different locations can get highly confusing and irritating for your guests.  They all have to be aware of the time and figure out ways to get from one place to another.  Having your ceremony and then reception right afterwards is so much easier then this in between crap.

And when I travel I do like to see the area I am in, but typically when I travel for a wedding I am travelling there, not because of the destination it is located in, but because of the couple.  If I want to see the area where the wedding is taking place I can do that myself and not have someone dictate what I should be doing in between the ceremony and the reception because they can't seem to plan a wedding without a gap.

I totally get what everyone is saying here and it all does make sense. However, I don't think I am planning with a gap if I am coming up with something so that people are not wandering around for 2 hours with nothing to do. In my opinion a gap is when you get married, say see you later to your guests and show up at a reception hours later. We aren't saying see you later we are saying "we understand that there is sometime before the reception here is a place that you can go on us."  I also don't like the word dictate. I am not telling anyone that they have to do anything, they are invited to a ceremony, a reception and a gathering before the reception. They are invited to everything, whether they participate or not is up to them. We are having a first dance that they can watch or not watch. I am not making an announcement telling everyone to stand up and stare at me for 3 minutes just like I am not making an announcement that they all have to be at a certain place at a certain time.  Like everyone is saying, they are adults and they can choose if they are going to participate in the provided activities if they wish. 

The point is, we would never leave our guests without something do to. We want to make sure they are happy without breaking the bank. I called my venue and it would be an additional 7k to provide them with food and drinks and the time at the reception venue.  We have the venue until 10:30 and we cannot change that time in the contract but we can add time to it. It is cheaper to host our guests elsewhere before the reception.  I want them to be happy without breaking the bank. I went out and got quotes and it would cost us approx 4k for transportation and open bar at a local restaurant.  If transportation were provided would that make things better for people? A big concern for people was that they don't want to be watching the clock. If I made it so people can enjoy themselves and we will watch the clock for them does that make it better?   We considered getting a shuttle to my beach house and my grandparents said they would host people there for the time in between.  I feel like myself, as a guest, would not mind as long as there was food, drinks and something to do regardless of how the couple did it.  

But the thing is you did plan a wedding with a gap and are now trying to fill in that time by making your guests travel from point A to point B, then stay there for a bit, and then travel again to point C. I get that you will be hosting them the whole time but a lot of your guests are going to be over your wedding and party by the time the actual reception starts.  I know I would be.

And when it comes to weddings, many times, guests will follow the schedule for that day because they want to celebrate with you (even if they aren't thrilled with the plans) so in other words you really are dictating what that person is going to be doing for 5+ hours that day.  Shouldn't those plans be as easy on the guest as possible?  And those plans shouldn't be taking up their entire day either.

I am just not a fan of gaps, even hosted gaps, because as a guest I want to go from the ceremony to the celebration.  I don't want to have to go to a random restaurant to kill time for 2 hours before the real party gets started.

PrettyGirlLost

amandaj424 said:

Maggie0829 said:

But having your guests have to go to three different locations can get highly confusing and irritating for your guests.  They all have to be aware of the time and figure out ways to get from one place to another.  Having your ceremony and then reception right afterwards is so much easier then this in between crap.

And when I travel I do like to see the area I am in, but typically when I travel for a wedding I am travelling there, not because of the destination it is located in, but because of the couple.  If I want to see the area where the wedding is taking place I can do that myself and not have someone dictate what I should be doing in between the ceremony and the reception because they can't seem to plan a wedding without a gap.

I totally get what everyone is saying here and it all does make sense. However, I don't think I am planning with a gap if I am coming up with something so that people are not wandering around for 2 hours with nothing to do. In my opinion a gap is when you get married, say see you later to your guests and show up at a reception hours later. We aren't saying see you later we are saying "we understand that there is sometime before the reception here is a place that you can go on us."  I also don't like the word dictate. I am not telling anyone that they have to do anything, they are invited to a ceremony, a reception and a gathering before the reception. They are invited to everything, whether they participate or not is up to them. We are having a first dance that they can watch or not watch. I am not making an announcement telling everyone to stand up and stare at me for 3 minutes just like I am not making an announcement that they all have to be at a certain place at a certain time.  Like everyone is saying, they are adults and they can choose if they are going to participate in the provided activities if they wish. 

The point is, we would never leave our guests without something do to. We want to make sure they are happy without breaking the bank. I called my venue and it would be an additional 7k to provide them with food and drinks and the time at the reception venue.  We have the venue until 10:30 and we cannot change that time in the contract but we can add time to it. It is cheaper to host our guests elsewhere before the reception.  I want them to be happy without breaking the bank. I went out and got quotes and it would cost us approx 4k for transportation and open bar at a local restaurant.  If transportation were provided would that make things better for people? A big concern for people was that they don't want to be watching the clock. If I made it so people can enjoy themselves and we will watch the clock for them does that make it better?   We considered getting a shuttle to my beach house and my grandparents said they would host people there for the time in between.  I feel like myself, as a guest, would not mind as long as there was food, drinks and something to do regardless of how the couple did it.  

Your heart is in the right place, but whether hosted or not, if there is an extended period of time between the ceremony and the reception that is a gap.

The best solution for your guests is to close the gap and begin your reception earlier.   They already have to drive a decent distance to the ceremony, then to the reception, then to their hotels, so adding a 4th place that they need to drive to, whether you provide a shuttle or not, seems inconvenient at best. 

Your guests will still be "killing time" and watching their watches whether they are being hosted at your grandparents' beach house, or a local bar, or if they weren't being hosted and had to fend for themselves.  However, I agree with you that hosting them somewhere is better than an unhosted gap.

My suggestions would be

1. Move your reception start time up to 4pm.
2. Host your guests during the gap at a place in Bridgewater, where the reception is going to be.

MandyMost

Whether it is hosted or not, the time between a ceremony and a reception is a gap. Obviously a hosted gap is better than a non-hosted gap, but it's still a pain in the ass. If I'm going to a wedding, I'm expecting to spend either may day or my evening at the wedding. Not both. I'm human, I get tired socializing for 10+ hours! I enjoy myself so much more for a specific time frame of the wedding of around 5 hours than I do trying to keep my energy level up for 8 hours. Never mind the drinking....if I'm going to start drinking during the gap, and the reception isn't over until 8 hours from then, it's not going to be a pretty sight. I'm either going to be sobered up and exhausted, ridiculously drunk, or already hungover. None are pleasant. 

PrettyGirlLost

Maggie0829 said:

But the thing is you did plan a wedding with a gap and are now trying to fill in that time by making your guests travel from point A to point B, then stay there for a bit, and then travel again to point C. I get that you will be hosting them the whole time but a lot of your guests are going to be over your wedding and party by the time the actual reception starts.  I know I would be.

And when it comes to weddings, many times, guests will follow the schedule for that day because they want to celebrate with you (even if they aren't thrilled with the plans) so in other words you really are dictating what that person is going to be doing for 5+ hours that day.  Shouldn't those plans be as easy on the guest as possible?  And those plans shouldn't be taking up their entire day either.

I am just not a fan of gaps, even hosted gaps, because as a guest I want to go from the ceremony to the celebration.  I don't want to have to go to a random restaurant to kill time for 2 hours before the real party gets started.

This is a big thing for me too.  Gaps, even hosted ones, kill the momentum of the day for me, so to speak.  I'm a high energy, I want to party and dance type of person.  After a ceremony has concluded, I'm excited for the B&G and I'm pumped to get to the reception and party with them and the other guests and dance all night.  Stopping in between to kill time during a gap really brings the energy level down for me, if that makes any sense.

Anyways, I am glad you are taking all of this commentary in stride and not becoming defensive.  You have always been really good about graciously accepting feedback on this site related to your wedding.  THANK YOU!

We may seem critical, but we really aren't and we really are trying to help you and everyone else out.

carliealissa

PrettyGirlLost said:

carliealissa said:

I'm going to go ahead and vote for going with what feels right/nicest to you.  As someone who is not old or crabby, I personally would enjoy what you are trying to do.  It could even turn out to be the nicest part of the evening. As long as there are drinks and guests to talk to, it will be fun. Someone mentioned that particularly as an OOT guest, they would want to do as little as possible and not go anywhere other than the reception.. that makes no sense to me.  When traveling somewhere, especially for a wedding which is usually a very short trip and expensive flight, you want to make the absolute most out of your visit.

Way to be passive aggressive.  Just because I don't like some of what the OP is proposing does not make me old or crabby, sheesh. 

I apologize for coming across that way- only the part after "someone mentioned" was in reference to you.  The old and crabby was really not directed to anyone in particular.  In addition, I was thinking in my head that while I have absolutely no problem with a gap, let alone a hosted gap, someone like my dear grandma (who is both old and crabby) probably would.

kgd7357

Party Bus?

sandwed1018

Just a thought- is there a museum or local attract between point A and point B that you could suggest people visit? Maybe you could work something out with the location as far as pricing if needed.

Jamiea291

There were a lot of posts & I will admit I didn't read through all of them, but you should check to see if there are trolleys that can take people around the town. The small tour would take up some time and show them the beauty that you enjoy without making them drive all over. Also, for any of the guests who will be lodging out that way, it will be a nice way to get acquainted with the area. 

SP29

I am not entirely opposed to go to a nice bar/restaurant that is hosted by the B&G in between. Myself, I would enjoy seeing the waterfront (or any nice place in a town I've never been).

HOWEVER- commute time and transportation needs to make sense. I would not appreciate having to drive 30 mins from church to bar, then another 30 mins from bar to reception and then 30 mins back to my hotel that night. 

Whether you go with a place in between the ceremony/reception or start the reception early (I REALLY don't see how hosting cocktails and apps for 1.5 hours is going to cost an additional 7K) and host something afterwards, make it within a couple blocks of either the ceremony or reception site- walking distance would be nice. The other issue you run into, is drinking and driving. Either people are not going to take part in your hosting as much as they'd like (and now you are wasting your money because people can't enjoy the open bar you are hosting) because they need to drive, or you possibly have someone who drinks a little too much than they should and drives. 

Yes, this could happen at any reception and people need to be adults, but when you have many different locations it makes it harder for people to do anything but drive in order to make it to A, B, C on time. 

You could provide a shuttle service, but then this is costing you more money and might be cheaper just to start the reception early. 

I think you best option would be to host a cocktail hour (or 1.5 hour) at your church. Punch/juice/ lemonade and some light snacks (veggie tray, fruit tray, cheese and crackers) can be done easily and MUCH cheaper than the 7K your venue seems to want. I don't know of any church that doesn't have a basement room the use for functions. It doesn't need to be fancy, but enough tables and chairs with food and drink and people will be happy. 

Jen4948

sandwed1018 said:

Just a thought- is there a museum or local attract between point A and point B that you could suggest people visit? Maybe you could work something out with the location as far as pricing if needed.

Who wants to visit a museum or local attraction while dressed up for a wedding?  Especially if you're wearing high-heeled shoes?  And why would anyone want to pay for that?

grumbledore

What happened here???