What do you think?

anna.oskar

There's a food poll over on Budgets asking if it's okay to just serve chicken.  If she goes with the "nice" venue she can afford chicken and beef, if she goes with the scenic venue she can only afford chicken.

http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/wedding-boards_budget-weddings_just-chicken-ok

I voted "you're bett off offering 2 choices" but that doesn't seem to be thought of many.  What do you think/vote?

bbyckes

I voted for serving just chicken. I don't know how much it really matters.  Before changing plans, we were going to serve everyone chicken too.

alixzafiris

We only served beef and a veg option and we were fine and I've been to loads that were only chicken. I think as long as it's a widely accepted food (chicken, beef) you're good with one, if you're serving veal or lamb etc. then you need another option for people who disagree with eating them.

charlsie26

We only served beef, but offered a veg option for those who asked.  Everyone was just fine with it. 

shellydiane820

one option is fine.  I think its a good way to cut costs.

MyNameIsNot

I voted for better to serve two, but then commented.

Really, I think it's better to choose the venue with the best food.  People do not care if they have a view, but they care if their chicken tastes like a shoe. 

temerityjane

I think it's totally fine.

I don't want to sound like a huge d-bag here because like most brides here, my main concern is really throwing a good party that everyone is going to enjoy. And I realize my guests' comfort and convenience needs to factor in, like in terms of gaps and location and travel costs and timing and all of that. But if I threw a dinner party or any other kind of party, I wouldn't make 3 or 4 different options, you know, just in case. I mean, I'd make a dinner that didn't suck and hope everyone had a good time at the party. There's always a lot of responses on this board that are like "well as a guest I personally totally wouldn't like that" but, you know, if a guest wants THEIR perfect party they're totally welcome to throw one.

I think offering like... salmon and only salmon is kind of not cool for a big wedding reception, but chicken is pretty universal. As long as it isn't BAD chicken, it should be fine.

MeaghanandMichael

I commented over there, but bascially I would be worried about other constraints of having a more expensive venue, not just a meal choice.

anna.oskar

Weird.  Thanks for the comments ladies.  I've just never been to a wedding that didn't have more than one choice.  I have been to ones with a single meal offering but it's usually a duo of some sort.  I guess i learn something new every day.

tlv204

I'm actually in the boat that I would prefer a view/better venue to multiple choices.  But I agree it depends on the quality of the food more than the choices to me.

mmdpm

Totally fine to serve only one meat option as long as it is a widely accepted meat.  Also need to offer veg option.

MissIntentional

the last wedding i went to served only chicken.

Marina007

Often times, I think wedding food ends up being not great, regardless of there being choice or not.  As long as there'e *enough* food, as well as drink, I'm a happy camper. And I would much prefer an awesome view, to a choice of two different meals, as long as that one meal is a decent one.

megandjay

I don't think I would care if there was chicken or a choice, but that it is a fun party. Hence our priority for a good band and negotiating the breaks so that the party keeps going the whole time. The weddings I remember best, where mostly about having fun with my friends/family (bride and groom and guests), not what was served for dinner. Although I do remember a wedding where there was not enough food and I was starving, I think we left a little early to go get pizza.

fangsiting

I don't eat meat, so I'd rather have the nicer venue/great view than a choice of chicken or beef.