Asking for money instead of gifts?

Tashatutuw

weebit wrote: »

Ok, I wasn't going to post again, but I feel like I need to clear some things up about myself.

Firstly, we're not having an "extravagant" wedding. We set ourselves a budget of £5000 which is what we worked out we could afford at the time. This was set without really researching into how much things cost. We had always planned for a wedding in Central London for around 120 guests. We have instead booked a venue in Greenwich (for which I negotiated a £2000 discount on the first quoted price), but the biggest difference in cost was for the food which is more than we initially thought. In total, we're looking at a cost of around £9000.

To help cover this extra cost, we have made cut-backs, have been selling unwanted things on eBay, and are gathering other stuff to sell at a car boot. We're also doing other things cheaper such as growing our own centre-pieces, buying in minimal decorations, designing our own invites and using a combination of self-printing and cheaper local professional printing.

Our band is free, our DJ is free. Both are friends of ours.

Nothing is costing us more than it needs to, nothing is surplus to requirements. In fact, today I worked out a way to save an additional £500.

Getting back to the subject of gifts, I would never dream of going to a wedding without getting the couple a gift of some description and I prefer the guidance of a gift list or honeymoon donation or cash or gift vouchers. If I don't tell people what I'd prefer, how many times will we have to tell people what we'd prefer? I don't think I could mention that 120 times!

I REALLY don't think you have to justify yourself OP!! You were asking a perfectly reasonable question and all these people with 'manners' are too rude to be polite about having a difference in opinion.

I feel the same as you - like I don't have ENOUGH to worry about without having to tell 150 people that I don't want a silver picture frame. We have had to tell his brother 3 times now that we have booked, and paid for our honeymoon so he can't do that for us - if I have to tell his brother 3 times how many times would I have to tell everyone else?! :wall: :wall:

19lottie82

FBaby wrote: »

Of course our family wanted to spoil us and ALL of them have given us money that has gone towards our honeymoon. However, we invited people who we only see very occasionally, people my husband had known forever, work people etc... and those are the people who shouldn't feel an obligation to give cash.

No one should feel an obligation to give cash imo

FBaby

19lottie82 wrote: »

No one should feel an obligation to give cash imo

Is it was indeed badly worded. We certainly didn't ask for cash from anyone but when family insisted it was easier to say that's what we would want rather than guests we are not so close to. We told them we didn't want anything and it was up to them.

Idiophreak

Georgiegirl256 wrote: »

Exactly this. I notice the OP has stopped commenting now, and I probably wouldn't have bothered if that bit that fab forty bolded hadn't have wound me up!

I mean seriously, because the OP (and others I'm sure) couldn't stick to a budget for their wedding, they expect everyone else to pay for it, that's exactly what it boils down to. Non of this faff about 'oh we've lived together for years, there's nothing we need' which is true for a lot of people I know, but that's just sugar coating it and basically you're saying 'we've skinted ourselves paying for this wedding, give us some money'

Ah, I see..

So you'd be happier giving them a bird table, or a toaster, or a Lilliputia Lane cottage and have them stick the wedding on a credit card and spend their first couple of years together paying for the wedding?

Nice.

Out of interest, how would you feel if you gave them the nude figurine you're so desperate they must have, only for them to sell it on eBay and use the cash towards the debt your attitude (and, yes, OK, their ridiculous desire to have the wedding they want) has forced them to accumulate?

Not impressed?

So how long must they suffer your crystal sherry glasses before you consider them adequately grateful and they can get rid?

Seriously, times have changed. The second the bride's father stopped paying for the wedding, the whole thing became a giant financial transaction. The bride and groom pay for the wedding. You give them gifts. The two things will *always* offset one another somehow. B&Gs can now choose whether they want a bunch of debt and a bunch of clutter or less debt and less tat.

Personally, we asked for cash (with the "we don't want gifts", "we just want your company..." and all the usual caveats) and spent it all on our honeymoon. We didn't get a toaster, or some slate place mats, or a silver cutlery service...But we did drive a 3.7l Camero around for 2 weeks, see a rocket launch in to space, swim with dolphins, swim with manatees, see the Blue Man Group and Cirque Du Soleil, eat in a 3 Michelin star restaurant, see a show on Broadway, take a helicopter ride over Manhattan, get a carriage ride through central park and made a whole bunch more happy memories we'd never have been able to experience without our guests' amazing generosity. It makes me fairly sad that there are people out there that don't see the value in that.

Stephb1986_2

Idiophreak wrote: »

Personally, we asked for cash (with the "we don't want gifts", "we just want your company..." and all the usual caveats) and spent it all on our honeymoon. We didn't get a toaster, or some slate place mats, or a silver cutlery service...But we did drive a 3.7l Camero around for 2 weeks, see a rocket launch in to space, swim with dolphins, swim with manatees, see the Blue Man Group and Cirque Du Soleil, eat in a 3 Michelin star restaurant, see a show on Broadway, take a helicopter ride over Manhattan, get a carriage ride through central park and made a whole bunch more happy memories we'd never have been able to experience without our guests' amazing generosity. It makes me fairly sad that there are people out there that don't see the value in that.

How was the helicopter flight? I'm looking at booking one for my h2b's birthday present. Would you recommend it?

Steph x

Torry_Quine

Idiophreak wrote: »

Seriously, times have changed. The second the bride's father stopped paying for the wedding, the whole thing became a giant financial transaction. The bride and groom pay for the wedding. You give them gifts. The two things will *always* offset one another somehow. B&Gs can now choose whether they want a bunch of debt and a bunch of clutter or less debt and less tat.

That's just ridiculous. If you see a wedding as merely a financial transaction then you really did miss the point. Gifts from guests should be precisely that and not to offset any expense for the wedding.

The way to choose not to have debt is to have the wedding you can afford not to expect guests to 'pay' for it.

Idiophreak

Stephb1986 wrote: »

How was the helicopter flight? I'm looking at booking one for my h2b's birthday present. Would you recommend it?

Steph x

It was somewhere between OK and awesome

I'd never been in a helicopter before and probably won't have many other chances, so I was quite thrilled by the whole experience and I really enjoyed the feeling of flying.

That said, it was quite brief (only really 10 mins by the time you're up and down), quite uncomfortable (I'm quite a big guy) and the place all the choppers go from isn't exactly luxurious...functional is the word I'd use.

The views over the statue of liberty, downtown Manhattan, Central Park etc were all amazing - but obviously nothing more than you've seen on TV etc anyway - and I had to look at Jersey on the way back _pale_

Overall, I probably wouldn't do it again for the cost (about £150 each iirc) - but I'm really glad I've done it once.

Idiophreak

Torry_Quine wrote: »

That's just ridiculous. If you see a wedding as merely a financial transaction then you really did miss the point. Gifts from guests should be precisely that and not to offset any expense for the wedding.

The way to choose not to have debt is to have the wedding you can afford not to expect guests to 'pay' for it.

Life's a financial transaction. I didn't mean that in a bad way.

The net of effect of a wedding for a B&G used to be:
Presents

Now it's
Presents
- Wedding
- Honeymoon

Before, you gave them a toaster, so they no longer had to buy a toaster. Which was great for them, they could use that toaster money on buying booze, cigarettes and T-bone steaks instead.

You could convince yourself that you hadn't, net, given them booze, cigarettes and T-bone steaks, because you'd given them *a toaster*.

Nowerdays, you give people money, which they might use towards their wedding, honeymoon - or just booze, cigarettes and T-bone steaks. Or you give them presents...Which, if they don't need them, get them no booze, cigarettes and T-bone steaks. The best gift, of course, would be? booze, cigarettes and T-bone steaks - ie exactly what they want.

If you give someone what they want, it's all good.
If you give people money, it's all good - they can just buy what they want.
If you give people tat they don't want, it's just a waste of your money.

You just can't get hung up on the fact that the money you give them may, in part, be used to pay for the wedding. It will still help them get their booze, cigarettes and T-bone steaks faster, which is the main thing.

19lottie82

Idiophreak wrote: »

So you'd be happier giving them a bird table, or a toaster, or a Lilliputia Lane cottage and have them stick the wedding on a credit card and spend their first couple of years together paying for the wedding?

If a couple are daft enough to "stick a wedding on a credit card" and spend years paying for it, then they are just daft, and it's not my problem.

People should be encouraged to live within their means instead of spending money they can't afford then filling the invites with tack poems about how they, of course don't want or expect any gifts, but would "prefer" cash.

Torry_Quine

Idiophreak wrote: »

Life's a financial transaction. I didn't mean that in a bad way.

The net of effect of a wedding for a B&G used to be:
Presents

Now it's
Presents
- Wedding
- Honeymoon

Before, you gave them a toaster, so they no longer had to buy a toaster. Which was great for them, they could use that toaster money on buying booze, cigarettes and T-bone steaks instead.

You could convince yourself that you hadn't, net, given them booze, cigarettes and T-bone steaks, because you'd given them *a toaster*.

Nowerdays, you give people money, which they might use towards their wedding, honeymoon - or just booze, cigarettes and T-bone steaks. Or you give them presents...Which, if they don't need them, get them no booze, cigarettes and T-bone steaks. The best gift, of course, would be? booze, cigarettes and T-bone steaks - ie exactly what they want.

If you give someone what they want, it's all good.
If you give people money, it's all good - they can just buy what they want.
If you give people tat they don't want, it's just a waste of your money.

You just can't get hung up on the fact that the money you give them may, in part, be used to pay for the wedding. It will still help them get their booze, cigarettes and T-bone steaks faster, which is the main thing.

I don't go through life seeing everyting in terms of the financial implications and indeed think it very sad for anyone who does.

To be honest I never have given money for a wedding present although if at a distance have given vouchers. I would certainly hope that a couple would have already paid for the wedding before-hand and if they couldn't afford a honeymoon then it isn't compulsory and you shouldn't hope that guests will give enough money to pay for the shortfall.