Is it appropriate to ask guests who want to stay onsite to pay?

StephLR503

Initially, my gut reaction to this question was NO.  If you host a wedding in a particular location and want people to stay onsite, you should be prepared to pick up the tab.  However, I've found myself reconsidering this answer if a few caveats are made.  Here's my situation:

The venue is an amazing private property near Lake Tahoe, CA that allows camping (up to 30 people) and has a lodge which sleeps 16 - 20 people.  We'll have free-range of the entire property for 5 days and 4 nights.  We can deal with the site fee, but it's definitely more than we WANT to pay.  Most people will need to travel for the wedding, so we're thinking about offering the site up at a significant discount as an option to those who are interested in staying onsite.

4 nights in my opinion is too much to ask of people, so this will be a very flexible arrangement - people can choose 1 - 4 nights depending on their wishes and what they can afford. If everyone wants to stay 4 nights, great, but if not, that's okay too.  We won't pressure anyone.

We'd ask something like $25/person/night to stay in the lodge and $10/person/night to camp onsite.  Guests definitely won't be able to find something cheaper in the Tahoe area, unless they stay with friends or family (which they could still opt to do).

When we communicate this plan, we'll reach out to the group of people we think would want to stay onsite (mainly our close friends and family) to let them know the prices and if anyone doesn't want to stay onsite, they don't have to.  If we have room for more, then we'd just offer it up to additional friends and family.  If we wind up not filling all the spots, then that's okay, too.

On one hand, I still feel like it's kind of tacky to ask guests to pay, but on the other hand, we'd actually be providing a lodging option that would be much cheaper than any surrounding hotels or vacation home rentals.  Is this really that much different from the way most destination weddings work?  Guests still have a choice.

I've read through some previous discussions and understand that collecting payments can be a bit tricky and I definitely think it's an interesting idea to ask the venue if they can collect payments and then refund us.  However, in our group of friends we're constantly organizing trips and sharing costs, so I know everyone is very comfortable with using PayPal and we don't have problems with some people not paying for their share.

Thoughts??

cruffino

i think that for destination weddings, its customary for guests to pay for their own lodging. it's nice of you to offer to chip in, but i don't think its necessary. in any case, i would do all or nothing. i think partial payments could get unmanageable fast. 

Wigglesx2

Same here. I was under the impression guests paid for their own lodging especially for a wedding away. It's not like you are charging them to attend or eat at your reception.

artbyallie

It is only appropriate if they are paying the venue where they are staying directly. If you mean, is it okay to ask them to chip in cash/checks to you, then the answer is a resounding no.

classyashley918

artbyallie said:

It is only appropriate if they are paying the venue where they are staying directly. If you mean, is it okay to ask them to chip in cash/checks to you, then the answer is a resounding no.

This. I agree that typically if a guest has to travel for the wedding they take care of their own travel, including lodging. But if the rooms are already included in what you're paying, and not being paid to the venue directly, you should just pay. You should not ask for cash from your guests to go to you directly. If you can have them simply pay the lodge, then yes, this plan is fine.

Edit: Grammar

Dreamergirl8812

We're renting out an entire B & B for 2 nights so know how you feel. Initially we put the cost on our wedding website but realized that was wrong (we weren't going to enforce it or anything so we would pay for anyone who couldn't pay for themselves).

So now we're aren't bringing it up at all. If someone shoves money in our hand, we will probably accept it.

The issue here is that your guests have to pay YOU. That's tacky.

QueerFemme

StephLR503 said:

Initially, my gut reaction to this question was NO.  If you host a wedding in a particular location and want people to stay onsite, you should be prepared to pick up the tab.  However, I've found myself reconsidering this answer if a few caveats are made.  Here's my situation:

The venue is an amazing private property near Lake Tahoe, CA that allows camping (up to 30 people) and has a lodge which sleeps 16 - 20 people.  We'll have free-range of the entire property for 5 days and 4 nights.  We can deal with the site fee, but it's definitely more than we WANT to pay.  Most people will need to travel for the wedding, so we're thinking about offering the site up at a significant discount as an option to those who are interested in staying onsite.

4 nights in my opinion is too much to ask of people, so this will be a very flexible arrangement - people can choose 1 - 4 nights depending on their wishes and what they can afford. If everyone wants to stay 4 nights, great, but if not, that's okay too.  We won't pressure anyone.

We'd ask something like $25/person/night to stay in the lodge and $10/person/night to camp onsite.  Guests definitely won't be able to find something cheaper in the Tahoe area, unless they stay with friends or family (which they could still opt to do).

When we communicate this plan, we'll reach out to the group of people we think would want to stay onsite (mainly our close friends and family) to let them know the prices and if anyone doesn't want to stay onsite, they don't have to.  If we have room for more, then we'd just offer it up to additional friends and family.  If we wind up not filling all the spots, then that's okay, too.

On one hand, I still feel like it's kind of tacky to ask guests to pay, but on the other hand, we'd actually be providing a lodging option that would be much cheaper than any surrounding hotels or vacation home rentals.  Is this really that much different from the way most destination weddings work?  Guests still have a choice.

I've read through some previous discussions and understand that collecting payments can be a bit tricky and I definitely think it's an interesting idea to ask the venue if they can collect payments and then refund us.  However, in our group of friends we're constantly organizing trips and sharing costs, so I know everyone is very comfortable with using PayPal and we don't have problems with some people not paying for their share.

Thoughts??

Unless your venue is offering the space for rent directly, there is no non-tacky way to do this. Also, if you are otherwise renting the venue for your wedding, you shouldn't be asking guests to subsidize a portion of that.  If it's more than what you want to spend, find a different venue.

Also, going on a group trip and sharing expenses is NOT the same as basically saying "this is the venue we want for our wedding, but it's more than we want to spend, so why don't you stay here and help us with the cost". 

Either offer the space for free, or don't offer it.

StephLR503

RE: (QueerFemme) Also, going on a group trip and sharing expenses is NOT the same as basically saying "this is the venue we want for our wedding, but it's more than we want to spend, so why don't you stay here and help us with the cost".

I definitely hear you, but to play devil's advocate, we would not be TELLING guests to stay at the wedding venue.  We'd be offering an affordable lodging option.  Anyone who doesn't want to stay there doesn't have to.

RebeccaB88

I think that if you do want to make the venue available for people to stay, they need to be able to book that directly through the venue, not through you.

StephLR503

Okay, here is another idea - instead of us proposing this idea of paying to stay at the wedding site - because I do agree that it's tacky to have guests pay us directly - what if we had one of our good friends (Maid of Honor or Best Man) coordinate the on-site lodging? Again, no one would HAVE to stay onsite, but those who do want to would work with our friend to figure out the cost of their lodging. We wouldn't overtly state that the money they collect will go back to us, so it might seem more like a more "legit" arrangement.  That would perhaps remove some of the perception that guests are subsidizing our wedding (even though I realize that's what we're trying to do).  Does that make it better?

We're going to ask our venue if they can collect payments because I think that would be much much better.  However, if they're not able to do so I'm trying to get creative  

LavenderHoneyBee

What would happen if no one decided to take you up on this? You would have to pay the entire amount, right? I think you should bite this cost. Maybe offer to host your immediate family and wedding party as a gift? (Not in place of an actual prseent, but in addition to). 

cheapbrideincentpa

If its only your closest family and friends, I don't think any of them should mind, even paying you directly. I would love to get a great camping trip at $25 per night with all my friends.

kinsey0628

StephLR503 said:

Okay, here is another idea - instead of us proposing this idea of paying to stay at the wedding site - because I do agree that it's tacky to have guests pay us directly - what if we had one of our good friends (Maid of Honor or Best Man) coordinate the on-site lodging? Again, no one would HAVE to stay onsite, but those who do want to would work with our friend to figure out the cost of their lodging. We wouldn't overtly state that the money they collect will go back to us, so it might seem more like a more "legit" arrangement.  That would perhaps remove some of the perception that guests are subsidizing our wedding (even though I realize that's what we're trying to do).  Does that make it better?

  I think this makes it worse.

NOLAbridealmost

Eh. I think having something on the wedding website saying, "On-Site Lodging Available at X Place on a First-Come-First-Served Basis. Please call B&G for details" and then offering to let people stay on site for a cheap rate isn't that bad.

Could it potentially offend a guest? Maybe.  But more likely than not you'll be making people who are looking for a cheap alternative happy. 

Caveats: 1) Be prepared and budget to pay for the whole thing yourself if no one opts to stay on site. 2) Ask the site if someone there can handle the cash/bookings for you. It will make it the least awkward to not have money changing hands between you and the guests.

QueerFemme

StephLR503 said:

RE: (QueerFemme) Also, going on a group trip and sharing expenses is NOT the same as basically saying "this is the venue we want for our wedding, but it's more than we want to spend, so why don't you stay here and help us with the cost".

I definitely hear you, but to play devil's advocate, we would not be TELLING guests to stay at the wedding venue.  We'd be offering an affordable lodging option.  Anyone who doesn't want to stay there doesn't have to.

It doesn't matter. It's like inviting someone to stay at your house for the weekend, but asking them to leave a 20 dollar bill in the spare bedroom.  You are asking them to stay at a venue that you chose to rent.  You didn't plan the event together. You planned it, you booked it, you should pay for it.

The ONLY way this will work is if the VENUE offers the space, and collects the money directly.  No family member, no wedding party.  If the venue says something like "the wedding of X and X will take place the weekend of September 1st.  There is limited lodging available on site, and camping available.   If you'd like to stay on site, the cost is $25.00 per night."  The venue can collect it for you, and take it off of your rental fee. 

it is tacky to collect money directly for an event that you booked.

QueerFemme

StephLR503 said:

Okay, here is another idea - instead of us proposing this idea of paying to stay at the wedding site - because I do agree that it's tacky to have guests pay us directly - what if we had one of our good friends (Maid of Honor or Best Man) coordinate the on-site lodging? Again, no one would HAVE to stay onsite, but those who do want to would work with our friend to figure out the cost of their lodging. We wouldn't overtly state that the money they collect will go back to us, so it might seem more like a more "legit" arrangement.  That would perhaps remove some of the perception that guests are subsidizing our wedding (even though I realize that's what we're trying to do).  Does that make it better?

We're going to ask our venue if they can collect payments because I think that would be much much better.  However, if they're not able to do so I'm trying to get creative  

Nope.  Your best choice is to stop trying to have your guests subsidize your wedding, and host your wedding at a venue you can afford.

BMoreBride6

To me this is kinda like telling guest they have the option of hanging out at your dinner venue after your reception is technically over, but would they mind writing a check to the bride in order to do so?  I'm 100% okay with not covering guests lodging that you wouldn't otherwise be paying for your venue, I'm not okay having guests cover part of your reception costs.  

winelover123

NOLAbridealmost said:

Eh. I think having something on the wedding website saying, "On-Site Lodging Available at X Place on a First-Come-First-Served Basis. Please call B&G for details" and then offering to let people stay on site for a cheap rate isn't that bad.

Could it potentially offend a guest? Maybe.  But more likely than not you'll be making people who are looking for a cheap alternative happy. 

Caveats: 1) Be prepared and budget to pay for the whole thing yourself if no one opts to stay on site. 2) Ask the site if someone there can handle the cash/bookings for you. It will make it the least awkward to not have money changing hands between you and the guests.

These are my thoughts as well. So long as you are prepared to pay for everything if no one takes you up on the offer, I think you're ok. I'd definitely have the venue take the money and reimburse you though - it's far too awkward to have guests pay you.

s-aries8990

The more I think about it, the more I fully agree with @QueerFemme. You are already going to be paying for the location, so asking your guests to pay, regardless of if its to you, your parents, your MOH, or the venue, is asking them to "buy it off you." I feel like most people would know you rented it out for the week, so why try and fool them into re-renting a space? It's you trying to fool your guests into helping you pay for your venue, and that isn't cool.

Feel free to include an insert with the fact that lodging is available on-site an to contact you for details, if Aunt and Uncle want to know if it costs anything, tell them that you had to rent out the whole thing for a few days in order to have your wedding there- maybe they'll throw you a bone, but DO NOT ASK. It is rude and is poor hosting.

jcrmc

I am not even bothering to read the post - just the title - and am saying right away NOOOOOO.

Guests are guests - you are hosting them. You dont ask them to pay to be at your wedding or reception. Ever.

ETA: Now that I have read the OP, I can see what you mean...lol.

If you say *Wedding will be at X location. Please contact THISPERSON for lodging arrangements if you wish to stay in the available lodge or campground*

But they should never ever be asked to give you money for anything. If THISPERSON coordinates the lodging, all payment should be made to the lodge/campground, not to you or FI or THISPERSON to then be forwarded etc.