How would you feel coming to a wedding like this?

Question

ok is it wrong to invite people to the wedding ceremony and to the reception for desserts and dancing but only have close friends and family for actual food its a huge wedding were thinking 300 people

Answer 1

Bad idea. You'll end up hurting lots of people's feelings. Remember: these people probably took time off work to come, bought you a gift and mainly took the time to show they care enough to show up. Either cut your guest list down to a reasonable size, or try a different type of dinner. Buffet style is always cheaper than individual plates. Or you could have finger foods (mini sandwiches, for example)

My wedding is 3 weeks away, and we ran into the same problem. Our solution (it's an outdoor wedding / reception) - we're grilling. Hamburgers, hot dogs, grilled chicken.. among other dishes. Not sure if this will work for you, but it's an idea.

Just DON'T pick and choose who gets to eat. It's not fair. Food is expected, and should be served to all guests.  

Answer 2

Its tacky and greedy. You want 300 people to give you presents but you only want to feed them dessert. Hmm dessert is like $5 so I can give you a hand towel and we would be even? Right?

Cut the size of the wedding down to a number of people yo can afford to feed and entertain or have it in a much more casual environment

Answer 3

EDIT: Aspasia's response is VERY good! My opinion is that anyone who gives a thumbs down to an alternative opinion, is someone who would only attend a wedding reception as a way to get something out of their "investment" in the wedding gift they would buy. Very selfish and I am disappointed at some of the responses to YOUR wedding issue. ~ Mom

I had that problem with my wedding. I ended up having to put on the invitation itself "Children By Invitation Only" so that only my closest relatives, who were children, would come. It is a hard decision to make because it can be expensive.

You should consider having two sets of reception invitation cards: one to be sent to family & close friends for the "meal" portion of the reception, and the other to be sent to invite everyone else to the dessert and dancing portion. If any of your friends asks about it, you can explain that, due to financial reasons, the first part of the reception will be a private reception for family only and will continue with friends joining later. Don't worry about hurting anyone's feelings because people should understand that it can get very costly to feed a ton of people. The whole thing is about witnessing the marriage (ceremony) portion of it.

(I wouldn't try inviting anyone to just the Dessert & Dancing part without inviting them to the actual ceremony. That would be offensive.)

Good luck to you!

Answer 4

Sorry, I think its pretty wrong. u mhave to aim for a smaller wedding. You can't really get away with it because I would imagine that it will p**s a few people off. Me included if I were on the 'desserts and dancing' list. 300 people is a huge amount. Surely you can cut your list down somehow. Try to scale it back to about 150 to 200 if you can otherwise you'll be paying it off for the rest of your lives. we had 240 people plus kids on our first guest list. After going over it a few times, we managed to get it down to 90 adults with only the children of the bridal party attending.

Answer 5

Quite cruel.  To have people only invited to desserts and watch others eat dinner.  How heartless.  And greedy.  You want people to give you gifts but you don't want to serve them dinner. You're going to lose a lot of friends and aquaintances.

Answer 6

That is the worst idea I've ever heard.

Answer 7

I would be upset if I was one of the snubbed ones!  

Imagine how those guests would feel if they were left out?  If it were my wedding, I would scale things down (dessert for everyone) and/or have less people.  Three hundred people is a LOT of people to keep entertained and to greet.

Answer 8

absolutly wouldnt  GO!  The people who attend your wedding are expected   to be able to eat!!! (by all..sice the beginning of TIME) !! I have never heard of it but perhaps if you nix food altogether and just serve cake (whatever) that would work. Other than that,scale down your invite3 list. *(this food cost is a dilima all over the world,and when one cant feed 300 they figure out how much they can afford to feed and go from there.)

Answer 9

Are you planning on providing dinner for some guests and not others while they are all in the reception area? Obviously that would just be rude. You can't feed some people and not others when they're in the same place.

I know some couples do have a close-friends-only dinner in between the ceremony and reception, and presumably that is more what you were thinking of, but then what do you expect the other guests to do while you and your close friends are off having dinner? If you've invited them, you're responsible for keeping them entertained.

What I would do is have your entire reception be only the dessert and dancing. You can have a rehearsal dinner the night before with your close friends, or a close-friends lunch or breakfast the day after the wedding.

Answer 10

is it a party or a wedding that's so rude how can you do that to people

i only like you a little bit have a piece of cake and dance

i wouldn't go fu@k that

go small don't invite them and say sorry family only and 3 friends each thats it people do understand that

Answer 11

Sorry, but I think it very rude. What do you expect all those people to do while youre eating? Maybe find a better solution that is still within your budget. Like a better priced meal or a smaller guest list?

Answer 12

Yes, it's wrong. You invite the same people to the ceremony, and then to the dinner/reception.

If you can't afford to host everyone to the full day, then you cut down your guest list or make other adjustments.

Answer 13

I know how expensive everything can be, but that sounds like a recipe for disaster, as those who were not invited for dinner will feel really snubbed.

Answer 14

That's a pretty bad way to treat your guests. If you are really tight with cash then you could possibly do what my cousin did. Both the groom (my cousin, on my dad's side) and the bride have HUGE families. They had the ceremony before their honeymoon and invited EVERYONE. Then after the honeymoon had a very small 'reception' with just basically immediate family and friends. (We were invited, but unfortunatley my Grandfather on my mom's side, her father, passed away the same weekend so we weren't able to attend) Or you could cut down on the guest list. 300 people is A LOT. I work at a pretty big banquet facility and the biggest wedding we've ever done was about that size. The smallest was about 80 people.

Answer 15

You cant do that. Its wrong to split your guests into two categories. You are right, 300 people is a huge wedding, so you should cut your guest list way back and have a wedding you can afford. You should provide dinner to everyone you invite.  

Answer 16

Ask yourself if you are having a "huge wedding" to please other people (because you think you might offend someone by not inviting them) or if you really feel like you just couldn't do without inviting every single one of these people.

You WILL offend people if they know you have not invited them to the VIP dinner and you WILL offend people, still, by not inviting them at all. But I honestly believe I would be less offended to not be extended an invitation at all than I would if I turned up with a $100 gift only to find that I'd only made the "junk list" that's not invited to have dinner.

One option would be to have an afternoon wedding and a short 2-3  hr reception with finger food and dancing. At the end of the reception you could take the party to someone's home to have dinner and continue the celebration with just family and close friends for a much smaller reception.

If you decide everyone just must stay on the guest list, then you will need to adjust your reception to accommodate them.  Just having finger foods and dancing at a reception is totally acceptable! Another inexpensive but very popular option (maybe because I'm from Texas though...) is to go to your local barbque joint and order bulk chopped beef for barbque sandwiches. It does offer a more informal attitude to your wedding, but so would finger foods.

Answer 17

so you are only going to feed a few? how would that work?? If I was one of the guest who did not get food i would be a bit upset! I know that is not why you go to a wedding but when people do things like that it looks cheap and kinda insulting. ( I have been to a wedding were there was a reception with only cake and then found out the "real" reception was at a nice restaurant down town that only half of the guest were invited too)

maybe only do finger foods for the wedding and then have a separate time when you celebrate with close family and friends. If not cut the list down some so you can feed your guest.

Just to add..it has nothing to do with a sense of entitlement like some are suggesting. It is called being a good host. Would I invite people to a birthday party and say sorry only a few people get cake?? It is about treating people who took time out to celebrate with you, some appreciation...and yes feeding them is a way to do it.

if i was only invited to half of a wedding i would probably not go... not because I feel like I am entitled to anything.....but it would show that the couple did not think of me as a close friend... so why are they inviting me at all??

Answer 18

If you'd like to split the cost, here's the way to go:  Have a dessert and dancing reception for about an hour for all your extended guests, and a more intimate, personal reception elsewhere following that.  For the people you'd like to invite to the smaller reception, place an extra invitation to this event in their invitation letters.

This is actually not uncommon, and not rude as long as you do not broadcast the difference to your guests who are not invited.

Answer 19

It's absolutely fine to invite people to your wedding and to your reception. If you decide that desserts and dancing is what you want for your reception, that's fine too. It is an INVITATION for heaven's sake: you are making an offer of entertainment to people who can either accept or refuse: what earthly sense of entitlement has led people to feel insulted by receiving an offer of hospitality!

I would thank you graciously for the invitation. I might even travel for it, and I would certainly come if it were in town.

Now, is it wrong to invite me to the reception, and not to dinner? I should HOPE no-one feels so entitled. If they do, where does the sense of entitlement end? Are they entitled to have breakfast with you, too? Go on your honeymoon with you?

No, the bottom line is that in addition to the invitation you have made to your three hundred friends and family, you have a life. You are allowed to have other, different parties in the course of that life. You can even invite some of the same people to your different parties.

Here is the secret to making it acceptable. Treat your dinner, and your ceremony-and-reception, as TWO *separate* events. Make sure that there is no overlap: that no signs of the dinner appear either before the fact or after the fact at either the ceremony or the reception to which the larger group is invited. You may need to plan carefully how to arrange that. Don't use the same invitations for both events, certainly. Maybe use different venues and travel between them. Arrange your timing so that the dinner doesn't interfere with the ceremony-and-reception. And you will be doing just fine.

Answer 20

So you only be inviting some people to half of the reception? I think that's rude.

If you can't afford to give everyone a full meal why not try a finger food style reception rather than a sit down dinner? Or cut down your guest list.

Answer 21

This is what I would do.

Invite everyone to the Ceremony and Reception. But have a Tea/Coffee and Dessert reception with dancing.

And then either that night or a different day, take the families out for celebration.  

Answer 22

not a good cuz then people will get mad at you and it could cause serious family problems. i wouldnt be very happy if i went! unless i was a close friend :)

Answer 23

I would be upset.  Why don't you plan your wedding for a time that is not close to mealtime. Maybe have your wedding reception at 2:00PM and serve cake and punch. Having no liquor cuts down on costs.  

Answer 24

Terrible. You can't single out people at a wedding

By the way, 300 people is alot....and as you mentioned in your question, there are obviously people there who you are not close to, as these are the ones you are thinking of singling out for no food.

So why are you inviting people who are NOT close family and friends?? A wedding is a time to celebrate an intimate time with those who mean the most to you. It is not a social function. Are you really that close to all 300 invited?

I would suggest cutting down you list to just those who you considered close enough for real food at your wedding. Those who you were thinking were not close enough for real food shouldnt be invited then in the first place. A wedding is not a time to show off or to invite the entire town...you celebrate it with those who mean something to you. I honestly can't see 300 people meaning THAT much to you, that you would invite them all to witness such an intimate moment between you and your soulmate...especially as you are considering singling them out at your reception because they are not close enough!

And if you really are that close to all 300 invited (which I highly doubt) then you need to come up with another alternative.

Have your ENTIRE reception as only deserts and dancing, and don't single out people because they are not "close" enough. Or you can have a cocktail reception of finger food? Have a lunch time reception? Have the wedding on a weekday so you can get some catering discounts?

Im not saying anyone should expect food at a wedding....I am getting married in 3 months and I'm finding out all about what people "expect" and I find it very rude!

But I do think it is rude to have half the people there eating dinner with the other half not having anything at all because they are not close enough. Like others have suggested, the only other way I can see you getting around (apart from my other suggestions) is to make them seperate functions. But having them as the same function, and then singling people out because they are not close enough is very rude.