Would this be Tacky????

wendybnola · March 2010

Im a clueless when it comes to wedding protocal.
So would it be tacky to have an open bar during coctail hour for the first hour of the reception then switch to a cash bar? I was thinking of offering a signature drink that would free to attendants (I would pay for the signature drink during the entire event).

Thanks for the imput!!!! Congrats to everyone on their upcomming weddings!

meredithl618 · March 2010

I don't think having an open bar for cocktail hour then decreased amount of alcohol available later would be a problem.

BUT, what you suggested, having an open bar for cocktail hour then surprising your guests afterwards that they must pay for their drinks, is definitely tacky, IMO.

If you can't afford to pay for the alcohol for the entire time, you should decrease the amount of options available. Ie, it would be cheaper to offer beer and wine than a full bar.

gottahavashorti · March 2010

Yes. Is there a more inexpensive alcohol option so that you can offer wine and beer throughout the night, or maybe 2-3 signature drinks so that there is a variety?

The only time I think taking away acohol at some point is okay would be if there is just tableside alcohol service during dinner and maybe offer the signature drink the whole night if you want. In other words, have the wait staff offer your guests a glass of wine or beer with dinner rather than have the guests be able to order from the bar for part of the event and then be asked for cash later on.

mbcdefg · March 2010

Yes, it would be tacky to only allow your attendants to have free drinks, and to charge everyone else for them. Treat everyone equally.

I think it'd be a bad idea to only give people free drinks for an hour and then switch to cash bar, for a number of reasons. If people are unaware of the switchover, and then go to get a drink during dinner only to be charged for it, they'd probably pissed.Or, if people know it's free for an hour, they might pound back the drinks as fast as they can to take advantage (which would defeat the purpose of saving money if you're paying per drink during the open bar). If people coming to your wedding are not accustomed to cash bars, they might not even have any cash on them in the first place. And I'm someone who considers cash bars in general to be tacky, although you will get a split opinion on this board about that.

Are you doing this to stay on budget? If so, remember that people most remember the food and drinks at a wedding, so I would personally do whatever you can to keep the drinks free. If you can cut from elsewhere in your budget - nix the favors, scale back on flowers, borrow accessories instead of buying them - I would first do that, because people care more about a free drink than they would about monogrammed cocktail napkins.

Or, offer a full open bar (beer, wine, hard liquor) during cocktail hour, and then switch it to free beer and wine only for the rest of the night. Or do all free beer and wine all night (and maybe a signature drink or two), if cutting the hard liquor will enable you to serve free drinks. Consider closing the bar about 30-60 minutes before the reception ends, or close it during dinner but put bottles of wine on the tables. If your venue allows you to bring in your own liquor, see if that works out to be cheaper (buy in bulk and look into beer kegs instead of bottles). Talk to your venue about what they can do for you.

MeaghanandMichael · March 2010

Very tacky.

wendybnola · March 2010

Thanks for all of your opinions. I am so clueless on how things are done at receptions!

mbcdefg · March 2010

The general rule of thumb is to serve what you can afford. Alcohol is not required for a reception. So if you can't afford it (or if you don't want to serve it for religious/personal reasons), then don't serve it. Water, soda and coffee should always be free. And it's nice if you can also offer other free non-alcoholic drinks like juices, punch, iced tea or lemonade on top of that.

It's fine to just serve wine and beer, and maybe a signature hard alcohol drinks. It's fine to only have wine with dinner. Do what you can afford.

As to whether or not a cash bar is acceptable at all ... that's really a matter of where you live and what your personal circle does. In my area and in my family, it'd never go over well. Other people here say that their families/neighbors see it all the time and have no issues with it. Do you see it a lot at weddings in your area? If not, or if you haven't been to many weddings, I'd personally err on the side of caution and assume that a cash bar isn't acceptable in your area.

Lasairiona · March 2010

It's definitely rude. Where you are located has nothing to with whether it is acceptable to breach etiqutte. What is rude in NYC is rude in Texas is rude in BFE. The only difference is that some areas blatantly ignore that fact and claim it to be tradition where they can do whatever they want based on what folks around them do. Tradition and etiquette are completely different things that are not and will never be interchangeable.

If you cannot afford to serve something yourself, don't offer it, period. A wedding is no different than a dinner party in your own home. The only difference is that for a wedding, you usually don't have enough room in your house to host the party so it has to be held elsewhere. But no one charges people for anything in their own home, just like you never charge anyone at your wedding. If beer and wine is all you can afford for the night, then that's all you serve. But then you make sure to stock up on ton of non-alcoholic beverages that your guests should never be charged for, since a large number of people who would like to drink do not like beer or wine at all. Your other option, which guests will likely appreciate more, is to cut out something else in your wedding that you don't care about to be able to afford a wider variety of alcohol the entire evening, so that guests never have to open their wallets.

futuremrsrichardhall · March 2010

I think it's kind of tacky.. But maybe you could offer beer, wine, and a signature cocktail to everyone free all night, but keep the "cash bar" for anyone who wants something else? I don't really know if that would be tacky or not, but it's what I'm doing... haha

MyNameIsNot · March 2010

Yes, a cash bar is tacky. Figure out what you can afford to offer, and offer that. You could do an open bar during the cocktail hour and the only serve wine during dinner. Or just do beer/wine all night. Or have an open bar for cocktail hour and then go dry.

Of course, whatever you serve should be available to everyone. Don't have free drinks for some and charge everyone else.

SuMmErKuTiE · March 2010

Ditto pp's... I was at a wedding last year when they did this and we were all so confused. It was open bar during the cocktail hour and then the first part of the reception and then once dinner service started we had to pay for drinks the rest of the night. No one understood why and believe me there was complaining going on amongst the guests and confusion.

If you can only afford a certain amount, try a having just open bar for beer, wine, and your signature drink so it can extend all evening and not cause confusion.

trix1223 · March 2010

You've gotten the right (IMO, of course) advice about the cash to open bar thing.

But I also want to emphasize that you simply cannot pay for some people's drinks and not other people's drinks. Even if those you're paying for are in your WP.

That's a sure recipe for everyone going and hitting up members of your WP to get them free drinks. It also creates a caste system for your guests, and that's just wrong.

GL.

CA2MT4EveR · March 2010

Ideally, an open bar would be nice all night, though I know not feasible. Where I am from, it's not a big deal to have to purchase your own alcohol. Most every wedding I have been to has been this way.

You can invite your guests in for a cocktail hour "on you". Have your DJ call last call on the "hosted" hour, but have them announce beer, wine, and your signature drink will still be available for the remainder of the evening. Most people should get the picture that if they want something else, they have to buy it. It still gives them an option.

sharshar91 · March 2010

I would actually serve beer, wine, champagne only. Or have wine/beer/champagne the whole time and do three signature drinks. Like your favorite cocktail and your "soon to be" favorite drink and maybe a like a wedding theme drink cocktail and that is it.

shericamarie · March 2010

just do a cash bar the whole time and save the money you would have spent on the open bar for the first hour on the toast. maybe you could have trays of your signature drink passed out for the toast, or just stick with champagne.

or just host beer and wine the whole time.

sabatron · March 2010

I would always opt for inexpensive red and white wine and beer over hosting a cash bar for the evening. It's a terrible inconvenience for your guests to have to carry around wads of cash for their drinks all evening. They're shelling out money to be there as it is, so I would feel awkward asking them for one more thing. You don't have to go "top shelf" for your wines and having alcohol free to the guests all evening makes for a more enjoyable and comfortable experience.

swoolsey · March 2010

I am doing a cash bar for a few reasons: 1) over half of my guests do not drink and I refuse to pay $2000 for an open bar when most of the people won't even drink. 2) I am refusing to let me parents help me pay for our wedding and am doing it all on our own. Tha being said, when it comes time to drop the money on an open bar or save it for closing costs on a house, I am choosing the house. 3) I do not feel it is my obligation as a bride to pay for other people to get smashed at my wedding. Yes, I want everyone to have lots and lots of fun, but I really don't see the point in being so snockered, you can't walk. If they want to drink, then they can pay. If, god forbid, they get a DUI going home, then I cannot be sued for supplying them the liquor. Call it tacky, cheap or smart. Its my wedding day and the most important thing to me, is that I get to marry the love of my life!!!!

gottahavashorti · March 2010

[QUOTE] I do not feel it is my obligation as a bride to pay for other people to get smashed at my wedding. Yes, I want everyone to have lots and lots of fun, but I really don't see the point in being so snockered, you can't walk. If they want to drink, then they can pay. If, god forbid, they get a DUI going home, then I cannot be sued for supplying them the liquor.
Posted by swoolsey[/QUOTE]
If you're really concerned about that, have a dry wedding. Does your venue not offer a consumption bar so that you're not paying for the non-drinkers?

Would this be Tacky????

Re: Would this be Tacky????

Choose Another Board

Search Boards