What is more economical?

Question

We have meetings set up with everyone for next month and into October to get prices but I’m wondering what, in your opinion, is more economical?

We’ve narrowed it down to four choices (albeit 4 very different choices so we have a hard decision to make). The first is to elope and we know how much that’s going to cost us.

The other three is what I need your help with.

1. Have a small ceremony at this beautiful church with only our immediate family and do the reception at one of our favorite hotels. They cover food, alcohol, tables, chairs, linens. Pros: the small ceremony can be at the church that I love, I get my pictures there, but don’t have to pay the hefty price for the larger ceremony. The hotel is one of my favs as it also has about 10 night clubs where my guest could go party after if they wanted to. Cons: The hotel can get expensive in terms of catering.

2. Rent a location for an evening. There we would have to find our own caters, officiate, and chairs for the ceremony. Pros: we get an entire location to ourselves so we have a lot to play with. Plus it’s a beautiful site. Cons: I don’t know how much money or a hassle it would be to take care of every single aspect of the wedding.

3. Banquet hall where they do the ceremony and reception for one low price. Pros: cheaper, everything is all together. Cons: sometimes banquet halls can be drop dead gorgeous…other times like a school cafeteria. Plus, I’m not sure how I feel about having the ceremony at the banquet hall.

So what are your opinions??

Answer 1

I agree, some banquet halls are UGLY!!!!  No way around it.  This would probably be the cheapest option however, and if you have time you can always 'shop' around for one. And Flowers and other Decor can go a long way towards sprucing a place up.

The option I like best and would go with is the first.  You have the people who are most important with you and no matter how expensive it might be 20-50 people is always cheaper then 100 people.  And if you think about it, wouldn't you rather spend 30- 50$ on people you like then 20 $ on someone's third cousin twice removed?  Also, with a nice restaurant, you already have ambiance and decor, so you save money there.

What ever you choose I'm sure it will be beautiful.  

Good Luck on your Big Day.

Answer 2

Renting a location and doing the whole wedding "a la carte" will almost certainly end up being the most expensive option - you may have to rent chairs, tables, linens, silverware, dishes, a tent, a dance floor, all the decorations, not to mention food and drinks, a bartender, catering staff, etc. That's not to say it wouldn't be beautiful, but it's a LOT to manage and may end up costing you a lot.

The ceremony site for #1 looks gorgeous, and this seems like the perfect option if you want a church ceremony and a reception. You'll need to do some investigating to see if the hotel reception is more or less expensive than if you organized your own at the reception site, and consider the other amenities as well.

The banquet hall for option #3 does not look at ALL like a school cafeteria - it looks really classy and beautiful. Have you been in touch with them? They may have a garden area, a pavilion, or a separate chapel/room for the actual ceremony.

One way you might go about making this decision is to do some investigating about the total estimated cost for each location, and then sit down with your fiance and make a list of your wedding priorities. Do you really want to have a church ceremony? How many guests would you like to have? How much time do you want to spend on planning? How much money?

All of your choices are so different that it's hard, not knowing you and your style, to recommend one over the other. All of them are definitely viable options, but it depends on what is important to you.

Answer 3

First, is religion important to you? If so, you will likely be happier in the long run, getting married in a church.

Do you want a small wedding or did you always dream of inviting lots of family and friends? I personally always wanted a small wedding. 30 is more than I wanted.  My sister always wanted something larger and settled for 50 at a lush location.

Banquet Hall - our local VFW has a way to split the room. Wedding on one side, reception on the other. Once everybody is eating, the 'ceremony' area is broken down, band or DJ added and the separator taken out to allow for dancing and music.

All your choices are way above my budget, so I'll let others answer about what is most economical (personally, the church and hotel probably are).

Answer 4

Well, I like the first option.  Even though it can be expensive in terms of catering, at least it's a set expense that you can prepare for.  With either of the other options, the cost can keep growing and growing to make it the kind of event you want it to be.  The first also seems a lot simpler and less stressful.  Eloping also sounds good, but deciding between those two choices should be easy, either you want an event or you don't.  Good luck!

Answer 5

I wouldn't elope if you are even considering having a ceremony.  You may regret it later.

I like the first option the best, then option 2 and then option 3.  Option 3 would be out for me because it seems like it would take so much effort and work and I don't really think you would save that much.

The ceremony is the cheapest part of a wedding.  So you can have as many guests as you want at the church.  They don't charge for seating there.  So I would invite everyone that is invited to the reception to the wedding.  If you are already going to have a ceremony.  That way they can all share that joy with you.  Just an option.

Answer 6

I love option #1. Yes, catering can get expensive, but you can get all the prices in advance and work the expense into your budget - plus you will avoid the hassle of keeping track of every detail on your own. I love the church, sounds like carries a lot of emotional significance to you - which is very important.

Answer 7

there are so many things to concider...if you really truly only want a handful of people and wont have regrets or anything later and in your heart you want the church wedding with beautyful pics and you can either keep the ceromony to imideate family or invite as many as you want it shouldnt cost anything extra... i say go for it the chuch was amazing by the way im not a religouse person but i would of been tempted to get married there it was beautyful then you could get a nice area all to yourself in resturant similar to companys christmas parts but i also have to say that the reception hall was stunning i could never a fford anything like that but if you can and the only thing that is holding you back is not wanting the ceromony there then get a close family memeber or jp to marry you on the common in a nearby park or if the reception location has a garden area...as far as renting a location do you have a friend of family member with a big yard maybe a farm house....thats what we did we got married on land that was in my husband family for years had our friend officate the wedding and had the reception in the barn you be amazed at what some white christmas lights and orgonza ribbion can do i was willing to sacrifice on some things so i could have the important things like i wanted AWSOME PICS where the photographer was there while we were getting ready, the ceromony and the reception so i guess what it really comes down to is what you value more if you dont need all the bells and whistles to make you happy then go with the small and intimate years from now its not going to matter your wedding was cattered or put luck what your more then likely going to remember are the quirky things that made it 'YOUR" wedding and people you spend it with good luck and congratulations :)

Answer 8

i would do the church ceremonythat you want and get you pics

then for 50-60 guests get a private room at a resturnat.  the food can be cheaper and then tend to include a lot!