Venue in Chicago WITHOUT preferred catering list

Knottie1464356063

Hi All, my fiancé and I are trying to find a venue in Chicago for our reception (possibly ceremony too) that allows outside catering. It seems that everywhere in the city has either an exclusive caterer or will only accept those off their list who charge $80-$100/ person, which is a little more than we wanted to spend. We are having about 150 for the ceremony/dinner and then 250 for the reception/after party... Any ideas? 
Thank you! 

Tyvm

Hi there @Knottie1464356063and welcome to TK! This is an international board, BUT there are local/Chicago boards, too. Just use the scroll down menu in the upper right side:


The members on the local boards should be able to help you out!

Tyvm

Hi All, my fiancé and I are trying to find a venue in Chicago for our reception (possibly ceremony too) that allows outside catering. It seems that everywhere in the city has either an exclusive caterer or will only accept those off their list who charge $80-$100/ person, which is a little more than we wanted to spend. We are having about 150 for the ceremony/dinner and then 250 for the reception/after party... Any ideas? 
Thank you! 

Just noticed this, OP. They're going to skin you alive. It sounds like you're going to have a "tiered reception" which is rude to guests. Posters on The Knot message boards do.not.approve. of this at all. Super against etiquette. Hands down. No doubts about it.

'Just a head's up on what you're in for.
Might I recommend editing your question and removing this bit about the tiered reception?

P.S. Bonus points if you respond with, "I wasn't asking for your judgment on my wedding choices, just looking for advice for a venue     "

MobKaz

Knottie1464356063 said:

Hi All, my fiancé and I are trying to find a venue in Chicago for our reception (possibly ceremony too) that allows outside catering. It seems that everywhere in the city has either an exclusive caterer or will only accept those off their list who charge $80-$100/ person, which is a little more than we wanted to spend. We are having about 150 for the ceremony/dinner and then 250 for the reception/after party... Any ideas? 
Thank you! 

Knottie1464356063 The dinner following your ceremony IS your reception.  You need to trim your list and host all your guests completely and equally.  What happens if your dinner runs late?  Are you going to have 250 guests banned from entering?  Are you going to tell your dinner guests they need to wolf down their food because the second, and rude portion of the program is about to begin?  Will any of these additional 250 after thought guests have anywhere to sit?

You need a venue for 400 guests at the moment.  You need to scour through the Chicago Park District to find a venue that meets your specifications.

geebee908

Well, it seems you can't afford the wedding you want; time to change direction.

You can't divide your guests into first and second string. No one will appreciate being on the second tier guest list and not being "good enough" to be served dinner. What will these guests do between the ceremony and the part of the reception they're invited to? What happens if dinner runs late and the second tier are standing around watching the preferred guests eating?

You figure out your budget and then decide how many people you can afford to invite to the WHOLE event. Then you can begin to look at venues and caterers.

KatWAG

Tyvm said:

Hi All, my fiancé and I are trying to find a venue in Chicago for our reception (possibly ceremony too) that allows outside catering. It seems that everywhere in the city has either an exclusive caterer or will only accept those off their list who charge $80-$100/ person, which is a little more than we wanted to spend. We are having about 150 for the ceremony/dinner and then 250 for the reception/after party... Any ideas? 
Thank you! 

Just noticed this, OP. They're going to skin you alive. It sounds like you're going to have a "tiered reception" which is rude to guests. Posters on The Knot message boards do.not.approve. of this at all. Super against etiquette. Hands down. No doubts about it.

'Just a head's up on what you're in for.
Might I recommend editing your question and removing this bit about the tiered reception?

P.S. Bonus points if you respond with, "I wasn't asking for your judgment on my wedding choices, just looking for advice for a venue     "

@TYVM I don't really get your need for a PSA but you quoted her so there would be no point in removing it. 

OP, I would consider looking outside of Chicago proper, where everything tends to be less expensive. And a tiered reception is rude. A weeding is one event, everyone should be invited to all portions or it. Otherwise you will make someone of your guests feel like they are less important to you than others. 

Tyvm

You quoted her so there would be no point in removing it. 

@KatWAG Yes, I am aware of my own actions. I did indeed quote the OP. Not everyone reads through all the comments on the thread. It's also possible OP might want to cross-post to her local boards. My advice could help OP get the input she wants in both cases. "No point" is rather hyperbolic.

You need a venue for 400 guests at the moment.  

@MobKaz Not sure, but I think OP has 150 at her ceremony, and then an additional 100 for her reception, likely putting her total at 250. She needs a venue for 250, or to drop her 100 B-list guests. Of course, she could have 250 new B-listed guests who weren't invited to the ceremony (and 150 who were only invited to the ceremony) ! Sounds like a grand old time!

CMGragain

Oh dear!  What an etiquette disaster!  The dinner IS your reception!
You have two choices:
1.  Invite 250 to BOTH your ceremony and reception. 
2.  Invite 150 to both your wedding and reception - no additional 2nd class guests.

Cutting down on the guest list will help you find an affordable venue.  It sounds as if you started planning the wedding without considering your budget and guest list.  If you can't afford a venue for all of your guests (including dinner for everybody), then you should rethink your plans and cut out some things, like alcohol, dj, flowers, even the dinner.  You could reschedule your wedding to a morning or afternoon event and be able to afford to treat your guests equally, as common courtesy demands.  Brunch is cheaper than dinner.  Cake and punch is also fine, maybe with little tea sandwiches.

Viczaesar

Tyvm said:

Hi All, my fiancé and I are trying to find a venue in Chicago for our reception (possibly ceremony too) that allows outside catering. It seems that everywhere in the city has either an exclusive caterer or will only accept those off their list who charge $80-$100/ person, which is a little more than we wanted to spend. We are having about 150 for the ceremony/dinner and then 250 for the reception/after party... Any ideas? 
Thank you! 

Just noticed this, OP. They're going to skin you alive. It sounds like you're going to have a "tiered reception" which is rude to guests. Posters on The Knot message boards do.not.approve. of this at all. Super against etiquette. Hands down. No doubts about it.

'Just a head's up on what you're in for.
Might I recommend editing your question and removing this bit about the tiered reception?

P.S. Bonus points if you respond with, "I wasn't asking for your judgment on my wedding choices, just looking for advice for a venue     "

Why are you suggesting she hide the rude parts of her plan rather than change them?

Tyvm

Why are you suggesting she hide the rude parts of her plan rather than change them?

@Viczaesar I told OP that having a tiered reception is rude to guests. Is this not alerting OP to her mistake? What more shall I say that ~5 other PPs haven't already?

What happens 90 percent of the time is they come on here asking a reasonable-ish question, but in passing they mention they're doing something that breaks etiquette. The community then focuses entirely on the etiquette break, and OP storms out of the forums incensed that everyone could be so mean (and not answer their actual question). 

I was just looking to inspire a new behavioral pattern,  before we beat a dead horse for the zillionth time.

wandajune6

I agree with what everyone else said. I also agree on looking outside of the city. Suburban park districts have great options and often have much better prices. We got married through the Franklin Park park district and had a fabulous experience, though I'm not sure they can accommodate a 400 person reception.

CMGragain

Tyvm said:

Why are you suggesting she hide the rude parts of her plan rather than change them?

@Viczaesar I told OP that having a tiered reception is rude to guests. Is this not alerting OP to her mistake? What more shall I say that ~5 other PPs haven't already?

What happens 90 percent of the time is they come on here asking a reasonable-ish question, but in passing they mention they're doing something that breaks etiquette. The community then focuses entirely on the etiquette break, and OP storms out of the forums incensed that everyone could be so mean (and not answer their actual question). 

I was just looking to inspire a new behavioral pattern,  before we beat a dead horse for the zillionth time.

If the OP had bothered to check threads on this subject, she would have quickly learned that tiered receptions are completely unacceptable.  Hopefully, she will learn from this and change her plans.  If she followed your suggestion to simply delete the offending plans in her post, she would learn nothing.
We all want to help brides plan the best possible wedding.  I am sorry if you are tired of posting about this, but it comes up all the time.  Brides either learn from our comments, or they storm off in a hissy fit.  Their choice, not ours.

thisismynickname2

Hi OP, 
You are definitely looking at $80-$100 per head at least for a Chicago wedding. Don't forget 10% tax and 18-22% service charges on top of that. To do this on a budget, you do pretty much have to severely cut everything else to feed people. We don't know what your overall budget is- $20k? $40k ? But to appropriately feed 250 people I recommend checking the suburbs.

I paid about $150+tax+service a head, but had fake flowers, handmade invites, no additional decor, and an off the rack, on sale dress. The high per head price can be afforded if you really want the city experience and are willing to trim elsewhere.

Tyvm

If the OP had bothered to check threads on this subject, she would have quickly learned that tiered receptions are completely unacceptable.  

@CMGragain But from the question OP posed, she wasn't aware that tiered receptions were completely unacceptable, likely didn't even suspect it. If she's been to a tiered reception before, she likely assumes it's acceptable, and would have no reason to search for the acceptability of tiered receptions.

Hopefully, she will learn from this and change her plans.  If she followed your suggestion to simply delete the offending plans in her post, she would learn nothing.

@CMGragain This is again false, as I just explained to @Viczaesar. I told OP "It sounds like you're going to have a tiered reception which is rude to guests. Posters on The Knot message boards do.not.approve. of this at all. Super against etiquette. Hands down. No doubts about it."  How is this not telling her the plans she has are offending? Must I repeat word-for-word what ~5 other posters have already said?

Maybe me simply telling her it's rude would then encourage her to look at the rest of the threads on the topic, because she is now aware of the potential to offend. Then we wouldn't have to have this conversation for the zillionth time!

On the bright side, there's at least one or two PPs who tried to answer her actual question, and we're having a discussion that's both beating a dead horse, but also about how we're beating the dead horse. So that's a new behavioral pattern, I suppose.

Viczaesar

Tyvm said:

Why are you suggesting she hide the rude parts of her plan rather than change them?

@Viczaesar I told OP that having a tiered reception is rude to guests. Is this not alerting OP to her mistake? What more shall I say that ~5 other PPs haven't already?

What happens 90 percent of the time is they come on here asking a reasonable-ish question, but in passing they mention they're doing something that breaks etiquette. The community then focuses entirely on the etiquette break, and OP storms out of the forums incensed that everyone could be so mean (and not answer their actual question). 

I was just looking to inspire a new behavioral pattern,  before we beat a dead horse for the zillionth time.

No, that's not actually what happens 90% of the time, and telling someone to hide the rude part of their plan does not help solve the issue of their rudeness at all.

Viczaesar

Tyvm said:

If the OP had bothered to check threads on this subject, she would have quickly learned that tiered receptions are completely unacceptable.  

@CMGragain But from the question OP posed, she wasn't aware that tiered receptions were completely unacceptable, likely didn't even suspect it. If she's been to a tiered reception before, she likely assumes it's acceptable, and would have no reason to search for the acceptability of tiered receptions.

Hopefully, she will learn from this and change her plans.  If she followed your suggestion to simply delete the offending plans in her post, she would learn nothing.

@CMGragain This is again false, as I just explained to @Viczaesar. I told OP "It sounds like you're going to have a tiered reception which is rude to guests. Posters on The Knot message boards do.not.approve. of this at all. Super against etiquette. Hands down. No doubts about it."  How is this not telling her the plans she has are offending? Must I repeat word-for-word what ~5 other posters have already said?

Maybe me simply telling her it's rude would then encourage her to look at the rest of the threads on the topic, because she is now aware of the potential to offend. Then we wouldn't have to have this conversation for the zillionth time!

On the bright side, there's at least one or two PPs who tried to answer her actual question, and we're having a discussion that's both beating a dead horse, but also about how we're beating the dead horse. So that's a new behavioral pattern, I suppose.

You didn't just tell her it's rude; you told her it's rude and to hide the evidence of her rude actions rather than to change her rude actions.

Tyvm

You didn't just tell her it's rude; you told her it's rude and to hide the evidence of her rude actions rather than to change her rude actions.

@Viczaesar Yes, this is correct. I didn't just tell her she was being rude, but I added advice for getting the answer to her actual question. If someone tells you you're planning something rude, does that not imply that you should change your plans? Or is "rude" an ambiguous term that can be interpreted as a compliment?

No, that's not actually what happens 90% of the time, and telling someone to hide the rude part of their plan does not help solve the issue of their rudeness at all.

Alright, so the 90% of the time was hyperbole. Maybe there's a post every other day like this, though. And in about 90% of those posts, the overview I provided was about accurate. 

If someone told me I was being rude and that I should probably not flaunt my rudeness in public, I would infer that I should either (1) change my plans or (2) become comfortable with others thinking I'm rude. Must I really type out the identical responses to the every-other-day-rude posts, when I know plenty of other PPs will do the busy work instead?

CMGragain

Tyvm said:

You didn't just tell her it's rude; you told her it's rude and to hide the evidence of her rude actions rather than to change her rude actions.

@Viczaesar Yes, this is correct. I didn't just tell her she was being rude, but I added advice for getting the answer to her actual question. If someone tells you you're planning something rude, does that not imply that you should change your plans? Or is "rude" an ambiguous term that can be interpreted as a compliment?

No, that's not actually what happens 90% of the time, and telling someone to hide the rude part of their plan does not help solve the issue of their rudeness at all.

Alright, so the 90% of the time was hyperbole. Maybe there's a post every other day like this, though. And in about 90% of those posts, the overview I provided was about accurate. 

If someone told me I was being rude and that I should probably not flaunt my rudeness in public, I would infer that I should either (1) change my plans or (2) become comfortable with others thinking I'm rude. Must I really type out the identical responses to the every-other-day-rude posts, when I know plenty of other PPs will do the busy work instead?

It isn't busy work if we are helping someone to plan a proper wedding.  Telling someone to hide their mistake instead of posting it is not helping anybody.
If you are tired of posting about tiered receptions, then don't post.

Tyvm

It isn't busy work if we are helping someone to plan a proper wedding.  Telling someone to hide their mistake instead of posting it is not helping anybody.
If you are tired of posting about tiered receptions, then don't post.

@CMGragain I'm helping OP get the answer to the question she's asking, while also alerting her to her mistake, and while everyone else is covering the repetitive stuff. It's called collaboration  

CMGragain

No, you told her to hide her mistake.  Bad advice.

Tyvm

We're going to have to agree to disagree.

charlotte989875

Wasn't there a thread about this same topic and region a few months ago? OP I would search around for this same thread to see the suggestions there. Also, preferred doesn't always mean required, but it may mean you need to carry event insurance and provide documentation of safe serve training or other licensing. 

cgra40

What if she doesn't mind being rude? What if the extra 100 are people who said they didn't really want to come to the ceremony or won't be in until later if they are traveling? Also this is pretty hilarious that someone was so aptly able to predict a hoarde behavior. 

Hi, OP. As a person in that area I'd highly suggest the suburbs as others have said. Downscaling is another option. But mostly I would recommend some extensive googling and creative thinking. Perhaps a place that isn't usually a wedding spot would be more amenable to your requests?

kimmiinthemitten

cgra40 said:

What if she doesn't mind being rude? What if the extra 100 are people who said they didn't really want to come to the ceremony or won't be in until later if they are traveling? Also this is pretty hilarious that someone was so aptly able to predict a hoarde behavior. 

Hi, OP. As a person in that area I'd highly suggest the suburbs as others have said. Downscaling is another option. But mostly I would recommend some extensive googling and creative thinking. Perhaps a place that isn't usually a wedding spot would be more amenable to your requests?

If a person is okay being rude then I expect them to be able to sit back and take the feedback and recourse from that action. 

If if those people can only make it to half of the event, they should still be extended and invite to the entire thing and the couple should still plan for the ceremony as though they were coming to the whole thing. A wedding is one event, not two, and I find it really hard to believe that 100 people will miss the first hour of the event. 

Welcome to The Knot. I noticed a few of your posts yesterday. Stick around, we are a good group with lots of advice, ideas and tips. It's hardly hoarde behavior. TK is known for being a wedding forum that places emphasis on proper etiquette so when someone shares their intentions to break etiquette, it will be something the majority of posters respond about. A lot of us had our hands slapped, so to speak, in the beginning. We sat back, considered the advice given, realized why what we were doing/saying was rude, edited our plans and stuck around to learn and share more. 

cgra40

kimmiinthemitten said:

cgra40 said:

What if she doesn't mind being rude? What if the extra 100 are people who said they didn't really want to come to the ceremony or won't be in until later if they are traveling? Also this is pretty hilarious that someone was so aptly able to predict a hoarde behavior. 

Hi, OP. As a person in that area I'd highly suggest the suburbs as others have said. Downscaling is another option. But mostly I would recommend some extensive googling and creative thinking. Perhaps a place that isn't usually a wedding spot would be more amenable to your requests?

If a person is okay being rude then I expect them to be able to sit back and take the feedback and recourse from that action. 

If if those people can only make it to half of the event, they should still be extended and invite to the entire thing and the couple should still plan for the ceremony as though they were coming to the whole thing. A wedding is one event, not two, and I find it really hard to believe that 100 people will miss the first hour of the event. 

Welcome to The Knot. I noticed a few of your posts yesterday. Stick around, we are a good group with lots of advice, ideas and tips. It's hardly hoarde behavior. TK is known for being a wedding forum that places emphasis on proper etiquette so when someone shares their intentions to break etiquette, it will be something the majority of posters respond about. A lot of us had our hands slapped, so to speak, in the beginning. We sat back, considered the advice given, realized why what we were doing/saying was rude, edited our plans and stuck around to learn and share more. 

Thanks. 

I agree reed that it's rude, but also I think it's very unnecessary for so many people to point out her rudeness when many already have without trying to answer her actual question. Personally I think that's rude. I also don't think that she should have to do her wedding any one way. 

I'm going to have cajole many people into coming to the ceremony who are happy to come to the reception for example because I feel like if I'm feeding them and giving them booze they should at least sit through the ceremony. They like the celebration part. Not the long part where a guy talks on and on about the meaning of marriage. Of course I also plan to have a relatively short ceremony. 

My my point was more that people are different and want different things and know their guest list better than us. It really depends on who her b list is. 

Viczaesar

cgra40 said:

kimmiinthemitten said:

cgra40 said:

What if she doesn't mind being rude? What if the extra 100 are people who said they didn't really want to come to the ceremony or won't be in until later if they are traveling? Also this is pretty hilarious that someone was so aptly able to predict a hoarde behavior. 

Hi, OP. As a person in that area I'd highly suggest the suburbs as others have said. Downscaling is another option. But mostly I would recommend some extensive googling and creative thinking. Perhaps a place that isn't usually a wedding spot would be more amenable to your requests?

If a person is okay being rude then I expect them to be able to sit back and take the feedback and recourse from that action. 

If if those people can only make it to half of the event, they should still be extended and invite to the entire thing and the couple should still plan for the ceremony as though they were coming to the whole thing. A wedding is one event, not two, and I find it really hard to believe that 100 people will miss the first hour of the event. 

Welcome to The Knot. I noticed a few of your posts yesterday. Stick around, we are a good group with lots of advice, ideas and tips. It's hardly hoarde behavior. TK is known for being a wedding forum that places emphasis on proper etiquette so when someone shares their intentions to break etiquette, it will be something the majority of posters respond about. A lot of us had our hands slapped, so to speak, in the beginning. We sat back, considered the advice given, realized why what we were doing/saying was rude, edited our plans and stuck around to learn and share more. 

Thanks. 

I agree reed that it's rude, but also I think it's very unnecessary for so many people to point out her rudeness when many already have without trying to answer her actual question. Personally I think that's rude. I also don't think that she should have to do her wedding any one way. 

I'm going to have cajole many people into coming to the ceremony who are happy to come to the reception for example because I feel like if I'm feeding them and giving them booze they should at least sit through the ceremony. They like the celebration part. Not the long part where a guy talks on and on about the meaning of marriage. Of course I also plan to have a relatively short ceremony. 

My my point was more that people are different and want different things and know their guest list better than us. It really depends on who her b list is. 

No, it absolutely does not.

kimmiinthemitten

Thanks. 

(a)I agree reed that it's rude, but also I think it's very unnecessary for so many people to point out her rudeness when many already have without trying to answer her actual question. Personally I think that's rude. I also don't think that she should have to do her wedding any one way. 

(B)I'm going to have cajole many people into coming to the ceremony who are happy to come to the reception for example because I feel like if I'm feeding them and giving them booze they should at least sit through the ceremony. They like the celebration part. Not the long part where a guy talks on and on about the meaning of marriage. Of course I also plan to have a relatively short ceremony. 

(C)My my point was more that people are different and want different things and know their guest list better than us. It really depends on who her b list is. 

(A). That's one school of thought. The other is when one person tells you what you're doing it rude you're likely to think they're just disagreeing with you. If many people tell you what you're doing is rude, you're more likely to get the idea that a multitude of people disagree with you and therefore your guests are likely to find it rude as well. There's truly very, very few unique situations. Thousands of people get married on a daily basis across the world. Being a bride doesn't make you special and as such you don't get to play that card here as a way to excuse poor behavior. 

B. The ceremony is the event. Without the ceremony there is no reception. I'm a retired party girl getting married in my late thirties. I'm pretty sure many of my friends assumed I would have preferred to skip the ceremony but that's not true.  Of themany, many weddings I've attended in the last 18 years of my adulthood I've never missed a ceremony. Invite your guests to everything and let them choose what to attend.  Chances are if you chose to B list your invites and left your "seemingly ceremony uninterested friends" off the A list, you'd insult at least one person. 

C. Again, this is an etiquette based board. So yes, there's many ways to host your ceremony, but if they're not guest centric and place your vision above your guests comfort, those ideas won't fly here. We're heard to tell you your ideas suck when your friends and family won't. You have two choices, hear the brutal truth from strangers who have no incentive to appease you, or continue on with the plans to B List at your PPD and standing room only reception and risk ruining your relationships. It's up to you. (Generic you). 

cgra40

I want everyone at the ceremony and reception personally. I get what you are saying but I still think it's rude to school someone on the etiquette part without any constructive feedback on the question part. For example I don't think the people who pointed out the etiquette breach and then answered the question are being rude. They are genuinely helpful. Those who just pointed out the rudeness on the other hand are being rude themselves. Maybe if it hadn't already been said or just said by one or two people it'd be different. That's my opinion anyway. 

Im not having a tiered wedding or a b list btw. If someone doesn't want to make the ceremony but says they are interested in the reception I'm going to politely let them know it's a package deal and since we want to keep the guest list low they should come to both or not attend. 

But it also another scenario. Let's say it's really really important to you that you get married where your deceased mom did. It's always been your dream. However that venue is very small. It does provide dinner services, but only for a small amount. You've found another venue you can afford that can accommodate many more people but doesn't offer dinner services. Then do you a)not choose the venue you've always dreamed of because it can't accommodate all the people in your life who you'd like to incorporate in some way b) choose the venue of your dreams but not have any aunts or uncles or good friends-only the immediate family and the best of the best friends or c) have a tiered wedding?

you don't have to answer (but are welcome to of course). I'm not trying to be argumentative. Just saying that there are situations that exist where a tiered wedding might not be the end of the world. 

kimmiinthemitten

The answer is simple, B. As an adult you have choices to make. If the location of your wedding is that important, then you only invite the people it can accommodate. If you have a large family and having them present is that important, you find a venue that can accommodate that number of people within your budget. 

Again, weddings don't give you a blank check to treat people differently than you otherwise would.  Would you tier a dinner or party at your house?  Would you *charge guests for the beers they drank?  Would you invite more people than you have chairs?  No. So you shouldn't do that at your wedding either. 

charlotte989875

cgra40 said:

I want everyone at the ceremony and reception personally. I get what you are saying but I still think it's rude to school someone on the etiquette part without any constructive feedback on the question part. For example I don't think the people who pointed out the etiquette breach and then answered the question are being rude. They are genuinely helpful. Those who just pointed out the rudeness on the other hand are being rude themselves. Maybe if it hadn't already been said or just said by one or two people it'd be different. That's my opinion anyway. 

Im not having a tiered wedding or a b list btw. If someone doesn't want to make the ceremony but says they are interested in the reception I'm going to politely let them know it's a package deal and since we want to keep the guest list low they should come to both or not attend. 

But it also another scenario. Let's say it's really really important to you that you get married where your deceased mom did. It's always been your dream. However that venue is very small. It does provide dinner services, but only for a small amount. You've found another venue you can afford that can accommodate many more people but doesn't offer dinner services. Then do you a)not choose the venue you've always dreamed of because it can't accommodate all the people in your life who you'd like to incorporate in some way b) choose the venue of your dreams but not have any aunts or uncles or good friends-only the immediate family and the best of the best friends or c) have a tiered wedding?

you don't have to answer (but are welcome to of course). I'm not trying to be argumentative. Just saying that there are situations that exist where a tiered wedding might not be the end of the world. 

So it's also pretty rude to tell your guests this as well. Yes, they should come to the ceremony and the reception, the ceremony is the whole point and the reception is the thank you for attending the ceremony. However, once you invite them, telling them they can come to one part (or nothing at all) is telling other adults how to behave. Are you planning to tell people who can only make the ceremony (but not the reception) that they can't come because it's a package deal? What if someone has to leave early; are your int to tell them not to come because they're leaving before dessert and open bar that you made for?

Also, your hypothetical scenario is called being an adult and making hard choices. Yes, it's a tough decision (for some people, for me it's obvious what you should do) to decide between a perfect but small venue and a large guest list, but sometimes life has hard decisions. It's pretty rude to tell your guests "we like you, but not enough to come to dinner with us after the ceremony, but please show up later when we can afford/have room/whatever excuse to host you". 

MobKaz

cgra40 said:

I want everyone at the ceremony and reception personally. I get what you are saying but I still think it's rude to school someone on the etiquette part without any constructive feedback on the question part. For example I don't think the people who pointed out the etiquette breach and then answered the question are being rude. They are genuinely helpful. Those who just pointed out the rudeness on the other hand are being rude themselves. Maybe if it hadn't already been said or just said by one or two people it'd be different. That's my opinion anyway. 

Im not having a tiered wedding or a b list btw. If someone doesn't want to make the ceremony but says they are interested in the reception I'm going to politely let them know it's a package deal and since we want to keep the guest list low they should come to both or not attend. 

But it also another scenario. Let's say it's really really important to you that you get married where your deceased mom did. It's always been your dream. However that venue is very small. It does provide dinner services, but only for a small amount. You've found another venue you can afford that can accommodate many more people but doesn't offer dinner services. Then do you a)not choose the venue you've always dreamed of because it can't accommodate all the people in your life who you'd like to incorporate in some way b) choose the venue of your dreams but not have any aunts or uncles or good friends-only the immediate family and the best of the best friends or c) have a tiered wedding?

you don't have to answer (but are welcome to of course). I'm not trying to be argumentative. Just saying that there are situations that exist where a tiered wedding might not be the end of the world. 

RSVP's indicate attendance at the reception.  There is no way of knowing whether guests that RSVP for the reception will attend the ceremony.  Not once have I known a guest to RSVP "Yes, we will attend the reception but plan to blow off the ceremony". 

For the record, if I know in advance that I cannot attend a ceremony, I typically decline the reception because I do feel strongly that the ceremony is the important part of the day.

Regarding your hypothetical question, the simple and obvious answer is that the couple get ONE wedding.  You need to decide if the venue or the guest list is more important to you.  A tiered wedding is never the correct option.