Donation bar worse than cash bar or no bar???

tdred

For those who are still offering me personal advice for my own wedding, don't worry, I'm handling it and not looking for any input. This question is about trying to understand why people react more harshly to the idea of paying whatever they feel like (or nothing at all) for their alcohol than they do to the idea of paying a fixed amount. As well as why people would prefer to be at an event where it is impossible to acquire alcohol than an event where alcohol is available for a price. Because to me, as a guest at weddings, neither of those things make sense. As a guest, I would absolutely prefer to be able to buy my own alcohol than to not have alcohol available. I would also prefer to have the opportunity to pay as much or as little as I wanted for the alcohol rather than have a fixed price. So I am posting here trying to understand why other people think differently. I get it from the point of view of a host, as a host you should be hosting the event, not making your guests pay for it etc etc. I totally understand that. But thats not what I'm asking about. So far, the only thing that makes sense to me is that some people would feel guilty and as though they were being manipulated if it was a "choose your own price" kind of deal instead of a fixed price. And I guess maybe I can see that, I just know that is not at all how I would react to it. But its interesting to realize that some people would. 

misssunshine17

tdred said:

For those who are still offering me personal advice for my own wedding, don't worry, I'm handling it and not looking for any input. This question is about trying to understand why people react more harshly to the idea of paying whatever they feel like (or nothing at all) for their alcohol than they do to the idea of paying a fixed amount. As well as why people would prefer to be at an event where it is impossible to acquire alcohol than an event where alcohol is available for a price. Because to me, as a guest at weddings, neither of those things make sense. As a guest, I would absolutely prefer to be able to buy my own alcohol than to not have alcohol available. I would also prefer to have the opportunity to pay as much or as little as I wanted for the alcohol rather than have a fixed price. So I am posting here trying to understand why other people think differently. I get it from the point of view of a host, as a host you should be hosting the event, not making your guests pay for it etc etc. I totally understand that. But thats not what I'm asking about. So far, the only thing that makes sense to me is that some people would feel guilty and as though they were being manipulated if it was a "choose your own price" kind of deal instead of a fixed price. And I guess maybe I can see that, I just know that is not at all how I would react to it. But its interesting to realize that some people would. 

So why did you bother posting??

tdred

misssunshine17 said:

tdred said:

For those who are still offering me personal advice for my own wedding, don't worry, I'm handling it and not looking for any input. This question is about trying to understand why people react more harshly to the idea of paying whatever they feel like (or nothing at all) for their alcohol than they do to the idea of paying a fixed amount. As well as why people would prefer to be at an event where it is impossible to acquire alcohol than an event where alcohol is available for a price. Because to me, as a guest at weddings, neither of those things make sense. As a guest, I would absolutely prefer to be able to buy my own alcohol than to not have alcohol available. I would also prefer to have the opportunity to pay as much or as little as I wanted for the alcohol rather than have a fixed price. So I am posting here trying to understand why other people think differently. I get it from the point of view of a host, as a host you should be hosting the event, not making your guests pay for it etc etc. I totally understand that. But thats not what I'm asking about. So far, the only thing that makes sense to me is that some people would feel guilty and as though they were being manipulated if it was a "choose your own price" kind of deal instead of a fixed price. And I guess maybe I can see that, I just know that is not at all how I would react to it. But its interesting to realize that some people would. 

So why did you bother posting??

Because I'm really curious about this. I seemed to have such a completely different reaction from anybody else who had an opinion on this that I could find online that I wanted to figure out why everyone else thinks so differently from me. 

aquari0216

TheBaysideBride said:

Just my opinion, but as a guest I would rather just have a cash bar and be done w/ it. It's a party, I would like a drink, and I really don't mind paying for it if you have a limited budget. I reallly, really don't care, I'm there to celebrate you.

AGREED!

STARMOON44

As a guest, I don't want to open my wallet at your party. I'm perfectly capable of not drinking for a night. When I accept your hospitality, I expect to be hosted. If I'm not going to be, I might rather just take myself out for the evening. If you have a cash bar, I feel like you're passing your poor planning onto me. If you have a donation bar, I feel guilted into helping you out. Like you're begging.

nebullama

Personally if I saw an open bar with a donation jar I probably wouldn't feel guilty per se, but I would feel worried for the couple thinking they had bitten off more than they could chew.  I would have mental images of a banquet manager shaking the bride down in the parking lot demanding she cough up money that she didn't have.  This might compel me to drop $$ in there even though I probably wouldn't have more than 1 cocktail at most.  Then I would feel resentful towards them for a while for getting themselves into a bad situation and almost forcing their guests to bail them out.

To summarize: A cash bar is tacky enough, but at least it didn't cost you anything.  A donation jar makes it seem that you already spent a huge chunk of money that you really didn't have and need others to save you.

tdred

nebullama said:

Personally if I saw an open bar with a donation jar I probably wouldn't feel guilty per se, but I would feel worried for the couple thinking they had bitten off more than they could chew.  I would have mental images of a banquet manager shaking the bride down in the parking lot demanding she cough up money that she didn't have.  This might compel me to drop $$ in there even though I probably wouldn't have more than 1 cocktail at most.  Then I would feel resentful towards them for a while for getting themselves into a bad situation and almost forcing their guests to bail them out.

To summarize: A cash bar is tacky enough, but at least it didn't cost you anything.  A donation jar makes it seem that you already spent a huge chunk of money that you really didn't have and need others to save you.

This makes a lot of sense to me. Yeah, I can definitely see that.

tdred

STARMOON44 said:

As a guest, I don't want to open my wallet at your party. I'm perfectly capable of not drinking for a night. When I accept your hospitality, I expect to be hosted. If I'm not going to be, I might rather just take myself out for the evening. If you have a cash bar, I feel like you're passing your poor planning onto me. If you have a donation bar, I feel guilted into helping you out. Like you're begging.

This, however, I really don't. I mean, if you don't want to open your wallet at a party and are perfectly happy not drinking then what exactly is the problem with a cash bar? No one is forcing you, or even trying to guilt you in any way into spending any money or drinking any alcohol. If you really are truly happy not drinking alcohol, and you're at a wedding with a cash bar and don't want to spend cash, then just don't drink. I really don't get why its something to be upset about or how it has anything to do with poor planning. A cash bar allows the bride and groom to present their guests with the *option* of purchasing alcohol if they would prefer to buy alcohol rather than not drink, it doesn't somehow make it any more difficult for you to refrain from drinking or spending any money. 

tdred

And I really don't mean that last post to be argumentative... I just really don't understand why it would be a problem. 

GypsyWife_

When I see a cash bar at a wedding I think "wow this is bunk". Does Anyone want guests to think that at their wedding?

Simply Fated

There is a huge difference between being cheap when you don't have to be and just not being able to afford something.

In this situation, you just can't afford it. That's fine. I would never side-eye someone who didn't have the money for something. Money is tight for a lot of people.
But putting out a donation jar looks cheap. It looks like you wanted something, but decided the guests should be the ones to pay for it. Your guests won't know whether or not you could afford alcohol. They'll only see that you want them to pay for it.

tdred said:

And I really don't mean that last post to be argumentative... I just really don't understand why it would be a problem. 

If you invite someone to your home do you offer them free non-alcoholic drinks and charge them for alcohol? No, you either pour them the damn drink or you put away the alcohol so it doesn't become an option. You wouldn't charge them for it. And if you wouldn't charge them for it at your home, then why in heaven's name would you charge them at your wedding reception, of all places? The wedding reception is for the guests. To thank them for coming to your ceremony.
Either offer them the alcohol or don't. You can also have a limited bar.
But if it's important to you, then don't be surprised if it's important to other people. And if you can't afford it, why assume they can? Cash bars are not there for the bride and groom to offer the option to their guests to buy drinks. You're sugarcoating it. They are there for the guests to pay for their own drinks. If you are going to do it, own it.

MissMWood

I went to a wedding in Canada last year for my Fi's cousin. They had a Toonie bar - Basically everyone pays $2 per drink and the couple picked up the rest of the cost. They has beer, wine & spirits on offer. They also had wine on the tables for dinner.

I honestly didn't mind it... Obviously an open bar is awesome but I would prefer to pay a small amount over having no booze. The couple had it on their wedding website so everyone was well prepared! 

Xstatic3333

Ok OP, to answer what I think is your main question, even though I am in the minority here, as a guest I prefer cash bar to no bar. I am from a part of my state where the most common system is probably hosted cocktail hour only, though. What I've learned from TK is that this is super unusual looking at the country as a whole. I don't judge couples for cash bars as long as its obvious. Once I was at a wedding where waitresses passed out wine and then brought a bill; that got a little side-eye.

Anyway, if I show up to a wedding and its fully open, I feel pleasantly surprised and slightly guilty for all I drink. If its cash or partial cash I feel neutral and am usually prepared with funds. If it was "donation" I would feel offended. I'm trying to put a finger on why, but I can't. I think it seems the same as a honeymoon jar to me, just like begging for handouts.

Again, disclaimer, my perspective is the tiny minority both on TK and nationwide, so I wouldn't use it to try to prove any points IRL.

NYCBruin

You're hosting the party. Offer what you want and can afford. If you have a cash bar or this confusing donation bar, I assume its because you want a "party atmosphere" where people can drink. That's pushing the cost of your wish to have a party atmosphere onto your guests, who the reception is a thank you for. Cash bars and donation bars are rude because they make your guests foot the bill for the party you wanted to have.

You don't have to have any alcohol. If you can't afford a fancy evening affair with the alcohol you'd like to offer (be it full open bar or beer and wine or some signature drinks), then don't have that type of wedding. Have a brunch or afternoon cake reception. Your costs would decrease significantly and you could even still host alcohol and stay within budget.

Because as a guest I know you had the option of having a less expensive but properly hosted wedding, yes I am offended by cash or donation bars. Because that tells me that you care more about your vision for a night time wedding than hosting me properly at an event that is supposed to be thrown as a thank you to me and your other guests. And that feels like a slap in the face.

southernbelle0915

tdred said:

STARMOON44 said:

As a guest, I don't want to open my wallet at your party. I'm perfectly capable of not drinking for a night. When I accept your hospitality, I expect to be hosted. If I'm not going to be, I might rather just take myself out for the evening. If you have a cash bar, I feel like you're passing your poor planning onto me. If you have a donation bar, I feel guilted into helping you out. Like you're begging.

This, however, I really don't. I mean, if you don't want to open your wallet at a party and are perfectly happy not drinking then what exactly is the problem with a cash bar? No one is forcing you, or even trying to guilt you in any way into spending any money or drinking any alcohol. If you really are truly happy not drinking alcohol, and you're at a wedding with a cash bar and don't want to spend cash, then just don't drink. I really don't get why its something to be upset about or how it has anything to do with poor planning. A cash bar allows the bride and groom to present their guests with the *option* of purchasing alcohol if they would prefer to buy alcohol rather than not drink, it doesn't somehow make it any more difficult for you to refrain from drinking or spending any money. 

I want to address the only thing that you still seem to be unclear on. It sounds like you think it's nice to offer the OPTION for guests to purchase a drink and if they don't want to purchase one, it'd be no different for them than a dry wedding. I understand that argument. Here's why it's rude:

When guests have to pay for something that is offered by the hosts at a party, that party is not properly hosted. It's no different than inviting someone to your house where you prepared pasta (water/soda) and steak (alcohol). If the guest opts for steak you say, "that'll be $6". You just don't offer it if you're not planning to host it. 

Fran1985

NYC Bruin covered what I think is bad about weddings. Most of the weddings I have been to have been cash bars, or hosted cocktail hour that converts to cash. As a guest, I would rather have a cash bar than a dry wedding too. But I can't help looking around, seeing the uplighting, the venue, the dress, hair and makeup, and realize the bride and groom cared more about how they looked in pictures than in giving their guests a full hosted event. I know weddings are expensive, but going to them is expensive too. Most of the time we have to buy a plane ticket and hotel room, plus a gift and sometimes even a rental car. For us as a couple, its usually around $600 to attend. And then to add on drinks to that? 

TiaTea

@tdred "This question is about trying to understand why people react more harshly to the idea of paying whatever they feel like (or nothing at all) for their alcohol than they do to the idea of paying a fixed amount. As well as why people would prefer to be at an event where it is impossible to acquire alcohol than an event where alcohol is available for a price."

I can't answer about all people. But in my circles alcohol, if offered , is considered part of the meal. Kind of like the soup, the salad , etc. You don't have to have it, but if you do, it's planned with care how it will match and comlement the rest of the dishes.
A wedding, even if it is at a hall, is like inviting people to your home. And the alcohol you serve is part of the meal you serve.
With that said, if I am invited to someone's house , where the meal is some pasta dish, but there is an option to pay an amout ( fixed amount, or amount of my choice) to get lobster , instead of the pasta, it will be tacky. Just magine going to someone's home, the host is serving the pasta dish , but informs the guests that there is lobster in the kitchen, and for a small donation they can actually forgo the pasta,  and get the lobster instead. Or for even smaller donation, they can have some more pasta.
I can get the lobster, I can buy it at a store , or order in a restaurant.  But if I am invited to someone's home, I shouldn't be asked if I want to pay ( or donate) to upgrade my meal. It will make me feel awful. Actually, I don't know if I 'll be hurt . It will be more of a  jaw-dropping thing.
On the contrary, if the host can only afford plain pasta with nothing on it, I will be grateful for the hospitality, will have the pasta, and will never think of the wonderful food that I could have had, if the host have given me the chance to "purchase" it ( or to donate in order to get it)
I feel the same way about alcohol: if you don't have any, it's fine. If you only have cocktails,  and switch to non-alcoholic drinks after that - it's fine. If you only serve it with dinner , and switch to coffee for the dessert and after - it's all fine with me. Having to pay ( or donate) to have more - no.

I have heard that in some traditions ( I think Irish, or Scottish, but could be wrong) it's normal to invite people at a pub, where "invite" is more like "inform". People gather there, but are responsible for their drinks ( and food? ) If you have some occasion, and pay for a round of drinks for everybody, that's appreciated, but not expected. Not sure if it is done for weddings. Maybe the cash bar/donation bar comes from there?

Cdesbiens

I'm going to preface this with the fact that I'm having an open bar- so no freaking out. I'm curious though, because this is obviously such a touchy subject, how people feel about drink tickets?  My future hubby works for one of the most profitable oil companies in Canada and they throw lavish Christmas parties every year- however, they do not have an open bar.  They provide 3 drink tickets per guest as well as wine on the tables.  Is LIMITING the amount your guests can drink as improper as a cash bar? From my perspective, they are being very gracious hosts by offering us a beautiful meal and 3 drinks and also being responsible in not allowing their guests to get obliterated on their dime.  Thoughts?

KeptInStitches

@cdesbiens, at a wedding, drink tickets feel more like you're at a carnival or office party than a celebration of someone's marriage. What might be okay for an office party isn't okay for weddings, IMO.

MayDay513

KeptInStitches said:

@cdesbiens, at a wedding, drink tickets feel more like you're at a carnival or office party than a celebration of someone's marriage. What might be okay for an office party isn't okay for weddings, IMO.

Again like I said before take the guess work, math etc out of it. I think it's so tacky when they have drink tickets at weddings, because then guests go around seeing if people have extras and I would rather have my guests have a good time instead of focusing on where to hunt down more drink tickets.

Simply Fated

Cdesbiens said:

I'm going to preface this with the fact that I'm having an open bar- so no freaking out. I'm curious though, because this is obviously such a touchy subject, how people feel about drink tickets?  My future hubby works for one of the most profitable oil companies in Canada and they throw lavish Christmas parties every year- however, they do not have an open bar.  They provide 3 drink tickets per guest as well as wine on the tables.  Is LIMITING the amount your guests can drink as improper as a cash bar? From my perspective, they are being very gracious hosts by offering us a beautiful meal and 3 drinks and also being responsible in not allowing their guests to get obliterated on their dime.  Thoughts?

For a work party, I'm not surprised or weirded by drink tickets. Usually it's more like the company is helping to pay for everyone to have a Christmas party rather than officially hosting it.

At a wedding it comes across as controlling, since often the reason is to limit guests' drunkeness. It doesn't make sense for a few reasons... For one because some people can still get drunk on three drinks. For another, some people can obtain tickets from others who don't use theirs and get smashed. Ok, and here's JUST my opinion, but what's wrong with getting a little tipsyish? Or a lot tipsyish. I don't drive drunk. I'm responsible. I don't need a sanctimonius bride monitering me. And for those who get obliterated and DO drive drunk, they still can. Trying to limit them probably hasn't worked in the past, so limiting them now isn't going to magically make them change their ways.

Also, it just looks like a carnival. There are plenty of ways for a bride and groom to save money, this is a silly way to do it. As you said, your fiance works for a wealthy oil company, so they don't need to limit drinks, they choose to. Which is fine. But imagine if a marrying couple did this? It looks cheap in a bad way. Not budget friendly or thrifty in a good way. I understand not being able to afford things, but there are great ways to make a wedding reception great without having to resort to tickets.

NYCBruin

Cdesbiens said:

I'm going to preface this with the fact that I'm having an open bar- so no freaking out. I'm curious though, because this is obviously such a touchy subject, how people feel about drink tickets?  My future hubby works for one of the most profitable oil companies in Canada and they throw lavish Christmas parties every year- however, they do not have an open bar.  They provide 3 drink tickets per guest as well as wine on the tables.  Is LIMITING the amount your guests can drink as improper as a cash bar? From my perspective, they are being very gracious hosts by offering us a beautiful meal and 3 drinks and also being responsible in not allowing their guests to get obliterated on their dime.  Thoughts?

I almost think drink tickets are worse than cash bars.

They still have all the "cheapness" and "I care more about lighting, my dress, hair, venue, season, inviting everyone I know, having an evening affair, etc more than my guests" vibe that cash bars do.

In addition, they are also awkwardly controlling. I assume you wouldn't count the number of drinks your friends had while over for dinner or watching a football game and then tell them they couldn't have any more. Drink tickets are insulting to your guests because the suggestion is that they don't know how to drink responsibly.

Finally, they don't even effectively control people's drunkenness. I attend a lot of events with drink tickets and never have only had my allowed number of drinks. There are always bartenders who will serve without a ticket if you tip and people who are happy to give you their extra drink tickets. Also, if I used up my three drink tickets within an hour or so (not too hard to do), I would be very drunk.

In conclusion, drink tickets are tacky, cheap, insulting and ineffective at actually controlling people's drinking. So, no they are not better than cash bars. They are worse.

Drink tickets are for corporate conferences. Not for thanking your nearest and dearest for witnessing your wedding.

Pepper6

Simply Fated said: There is a huge difference between being cheap when you don't have to be and just not being able to afford something.

In this situation, you just can't afford it. That's fine. I would never side-eye someone who didn't have the money for something. Money is tight for a lot of people.
But putting out a donation jar looks cheap. It looks like you wanted something, but decided the guests should be the ones to pay for it. Your guests won't know whether or not you could afford alcohol. They'll only see that you want them to pay for it.


tdred said: And I really don't mean that last post to be argumentative... I just really don't understand why it would be a problem.  If you invite someone to your home do you offer them free non-alcoholic drinks and charge them for alcohol? No, you either pour them the damn drink or you put away the alcohol so it doesn't become an option. You wouldn't charge them for it. And if you wouldn't charge them for it at your home, then why in heaven's name would you charge them at your wedding reception, of all places? The wedding reception is for the guests. To thank them for coming to your ceremony.
Either offer them the alcohol or don't. You can also have a limited bar.
But if it's important to you, then don't be surprised if it's important to other people. And if you can't afford it, why assume they can? Cash bars are not there for the bride and groom to offer the option to their guests to buy drinks. You're sugarcoating it. They are there for the guests to pay for their own drinks. If you are going to do it, own it.


I guess this is why no one blinks at a cash bar in my circle, since every house party I've ever attended is always BYOB.  They may have water or limited sodas available, but never alcohol.

Bubblegum5586

tammym1001 said:

I would honestly rather be able to have alcohol even if I had to pay for it, but I wouldn't be happy about  it. I think that a donation jar would confuse me though. I would probably think it was for tips for the bartender or something. I've never heard of a donation jar for the bar.

I agree with this. I much rather have the option to pay for a drink then not be able to get a drink at all. And the jar would confused me..

NYCBruin

bubblegum1309 said:

tammym1001 said:

I would honestly rather be able to have alcohol even if I had to pay for it, but I wouldn't be happy about  it. I think that a donation jar would confuse me though. I would probably think it was for tips for the bartender or something. I've never heard of a donation jar for the bar.

I agree with this. I much rather have the option to pay for a drink then not be able to get a drink at all. And the jar would confused me..



I'm sorry, but I HATE when people turn cash bars into a false dichotomy. NO there are a million other choices. It's not cash bar or no bar. Ever. There are always things that could be scaled back or trimmed. Sure, at an evening wedding I want a cocktail. But at a brunch or afternoon reception, you're telling me you'd rather have a rude hostess with a cash bar than spend two hours in the middle of the day without alcohol? If you move the reception to a not heavy drinking time, people don't expect alcohol at all. The bar becomes a non-issue. Which goes back to my main point: cash bars are always about the bride/groom wanting a party (typically an evening dinner and dancing party that lasts hours) that they can't afford more than they care about actually graciously hosting their guests as a thank you for attending the ceremony.

tdred

Pepper6 said:

Simply Fated said:

There is a huge difference between being cheap when you don't have to be and just not being able to afford something.

In this situation, you just can't afford it. That's fine. I would never side-eye someone who didn't have the money for something. Money is tight for a lot of people.
But putting out a donation jar looks cheap. It looks like you wanted something, but decided the guests should be the ones to pay for it. Your guests won't know whether or not you could afford alcohol. They'll only see that you want them to pay for it.

tdred said:

And I really don't mean that last post to be argumentative... I just really don't understand why it would be a problem. 

If you invite someone to your home do you offer them free non-alcoholic drinks and charge them for alcohol? No, you either pour them the damn drink or you put away the alcohol so it doesn't become an option. You wouldn't charge them for it. And if you wouldn't charge them for it at your home, then why in heaven's name would you charge them at your wedding reception, of all places? The wedding reception is for the guests. To thank them for coming to your ceremony.
Either offer them the alcohol or don't. You can also have a limited bar.
But if it's important to you, then don't be surprised if it's important to other people. And if you can't afford it, why assume they can? Cash bars are not there for the bride and groom to offer the option to their guests to buy drinks. You're sugarcoating it. They are there for the guests to pay for their own drinks. If you are going to do it, own it.

I guess this is why no one blinks at a cash bar in my circle, since every house party I've ever attended is always BYOB.  They may have water or limited sodas available, but never alcohol.

Yeah, I was starting to wonder if that is part of it. I have no problem with either attending or hosting a BYOB event, and neither do my friends. It's just not looked down upon as being inconsiderate or tacky to ask your friends to pay for their own alcohol at an event (dinner, watching the superbowl, etc etc) you are hosting at your place. I would in no way be offended by such a BYOB event because I totally understand that alcohol is expensive and I don't expect others, when they're already being so nice as to host an event, to foot the bill for my alcohol. If they do, thats awesome and much appreciated, but I don't go around expecting that they will and being offended if they don't. Just as recently I went to a friends wedding where they had wine on the table and a cash bar (well, ticket cash bar, $2 per ticket) and while I was surprised because I hadn't been expecting it, it didn't then make me start thinking about how tacky the bride was that she didn't pay for all my alcohol herself. She is a close friend of mine who was already dishing out a fair amount of cash for us to be able to be there and celebrate this wonderful occasion with her. I couldn't care less whether she paid for alcohol or had it available for us to purchase, I was there to celebrate her on her special day. I guess thats part of it too... I'm having a hard time understanding why guests would allow small things like this to sour the day. You're there to support someone you love and you'd really become turned off and start thinking them cheap and tacky just because they didn't pay for your alcohol after already paying a lot just to make the party possible? I guess its just something I'm not going to understand. If you don't really care about the couple, don't go to the wedding, if you do care about them, then why would you turn it into something about you? And yes, I'm saying this as guest not as bride. Obviously the bride should be very concerned about her guests, but as a guest I just can't imagine thinking badly of the bride and groom just because they didn't pay for my alcohol. 

tdred

NYCBruin said:

I'm sorry, but I HATE when people turn cash bars into a false dichotomy. NO there are a million other choices. It's not cash bar or no bar. Ever. There are always things that could be scaled back or trimmed. Sure, at an evening wedding I want a cocktail. But at a brunch or afternoon reception, you're telling me you'd rather have a rude hostess with a cash bar than spend two hours in the middle of the day without alcohol? If you move the reception to a not heavy drinking time, people don't expect alcohol at all. The bar becomes a non-issue. Which goes back to my main point: cash bars are always about the bride/groom wanting a party (typically an evening dinner and dancing party that lasts hours) that they can't afford more than they care about actually graciously hosting their guests as a thank you for attending the ceremony.

Interesting... yeah, maybe thats where part of the difference comes in then as well... As a guest I would absolutely prefer a long event including music and dancing even if it meant I had to pay for my own alcohol than just a short little brunch gathering. Its interesting to find that other people would prefer it otherwise. 

NYCBruin

tdred said:

NYCBruin said:

bubblegum1309 said:

I'm sorry, but I HATE when people turn cash bars into a false dichotomy. NO there are a million other choices. It's not cash bar or no bar. Ever. There are always things that could be scaled back or trimmed. Sure, at an evening wedding I want a cocktail. But at a brunch or afternoon reception, you're telling me you'd rather have a rude hostess with a cash bar than spend two hours in the middle of the day without alcohol? If you move the reception to a not heavy drinking time, people don't expect alcohol at all. The bar becomes a non-issue. Which goes back to my main point: cash bars are always about the bride/groom wanting a party (typically an evening dinner and dancing party that lasts hours) that they can't afford more than they care about actually graciously hosting their guests as a thank you for attending the ceremony.

Interesting... yeah, maybe thats where part of the difference comes in then as well... As a guest I would absolutely prefer a long event including music and dancing even if it meant I had to pay for my own alcohol than just a short little brunch gathering. Its interesting to find that other people would prefer it otherwise. 



I also prefer nights out with dancing and drinking. FI and I frequently go to bars/clubs with our friends to have this. All I'm saying is that the HOST is the one who makes decisions about the event: time of day, type of food, the amount of alcohol (if any). It's selfish of the bride and groom to push the costs of their wish for an evening fete onto their guests. There are lots of things we would love to have at our wedding but we can't afford them, so we won't be having them not having our guests subsidize them.

KDM323

It is simply rude.

Hopefully, at a wedding, the bride and groom would be polite enough not to burp at the table, not speak with food in their mouths and will not get completely drunk and act like fools dancing on tables, etc.

While it may be "acceptable" in their social circles and when at home to do these things...hopefully it would be something they would have the common courtesy NOT to do at their wedding.

Think of hosting the event and a bar/alcohol in the same manner.  While in their 'circle' it may be perfectly acceptable to charge their guests to drink or ask for 'donations'...one would HOPE that they have enough class NOT to do so.

MGP

Let me just say I am totally fine with dry weddings, and respect it whether it has to do with budget or beliefs.  I can certainly forgo drinking for a few hours, stop for drinks after the wedding, or have a glass of wine when I get home.  Not a problem.

I am also totally fine with open bars.  

We have all been to weddings where some of the components weren't necessarily our favorite or what we would have chose for our own day.  At (properly hosted) events I have graciously accepted the dry chicken dish, the weak vodka tonics, or the cheap Chardonnay like a champ.  Why?  Because I was a GUEST.

"He who pays, gets a say" - love this expression!  

"He who doesn't pay, doesn't get a say" - the converse is true too.

But you know what's inappropriate?  Trying to justify the mix of the above - "He who doesn't get a say, is still expected to pay".  And that's exactly what a cash bar is!  And the spin of "well at least you still have the OPTION" just makes it worse.

And with all other breaches of etiquette - just because they are common "in some circles" or "no one said anything about it" doesn't mean it's right or that people didn't have a problem with it.  People remember the bad before the good.  I have family members that still talk about cash bars from weddings from the 70's and how rude and tacky it was.