large booking at restaurant- how to split the bill?

Pollycat

Spendless wrote: »

We are at the birthday party meal this weekend. The subject of taking some money with us came up this morning. Our hosts are paying for 2 courses. we need to pay for son's third course plus all drinks for the 3 of us. Having had some additional unexpected expenses and it being a week off payday, I have suggested that we buy our drinks separately at the bar to avoid being drawn into a we'll split the drinks bill between the whole party scenario.

Sensible idea.

I think a number of posters have touched on the 'being up front about dealing with the bill' scenario being the besy way to do things.

Enjoy the party.

thorsoak

I cannot believe that this thread has attracted almost 2,100 posts!

I've always gone by the mantra "If I invite people, I pay, if I agree to go out with others, we share the bill equally. If I can't afford to share, then I don't go. If people are going to quibble, then I don't go again.

Life's too short to agonise over it.

duchy

missbiggles1 wrote: »

The one thing we didn't share was a taste in music so I simply went to gigs on my own. I don't get the idea that you have to round up people to do things with - some of us are happy with our own company and don't feel the need to surround ourselves with all and sundry every time we step outside the house.

Where did I say I had to round people up ????
We've attended shows by this artist for years .......inevitably people have got to know each other and friendships have formed through the common interest . In fact I booked a single ticket for me this week for one particular show and just five minutes ago got a message from one of that group asking if I was going and saying we must make plans for getting together that night . It's not forced or needs "rounding up" it just happens organically and sharing an experience like a performance is always more fun - who wants to go straight home afterwards without speaking to a soul when you can have a tableful of likeminded people discussing it over a convivial meal ?
It enhances the experience.

Spendless

thorsoak wrote: »

I've always gone by the mantra "If I invite people, I pay, if I agree to go out with others, we share the bill equally. If I can't afford to share, then I don't go. If people are going to quibble, then I don't go again.Life's too short to agonise over it.

I wonder if this is dependant on your life stage as well as financial situation. If my parents invite us out for a celebration they pay. When we invited them for our son's 16th, we thought we should pay for them but they insisted on making a contribution which more than covered their share. But they are semi-retired, both past pension age but still working to finance a better lifestyle, have savings, mortgage paid off and me and my sister left home 20+ years ago.

I wouldn't expect my sister to automatically fund a meal for us in the same way, even if she invited us, unless she specifically said she would, as she like us still has teenage schoolkids and a mortgage and the associated cost.

missbiggles1

thorsoak wrote: »

I cannot believe that this thread has attracted almost 2,100 posts!

I've always gone by the mantra "If I invite people, I pay, if I agree to go out with others, we share the bill equally. If I can't afford to share, then I don't go. If people are going to quibble, then I don't go again.

Life's too short to agonise over it.

Aptly and succinctly put.:T:T

mumps

missbiggles1 wrote: »

I'd think they were being thoughtful by choosing cheaper restaurants so you could still be part of things, but then I don't see eating in cheaper restaurants as being demoted to the second division.

Life has its ebbs and flows both in terms of health and finances - you have to adjust to these changes and go with the flow.

You gave an example of people going out for a pizza or curry instead, someone else mentioned going for a coffee and cake instead. None of those would be things I can now eat. However, a very nice expensive restaurant where I know the chef, our children went to school together, would be happy to make something plainer for me and my friends would eat the richer things that I can't manage.

missbiggles1 wrote: »

I don't think anybody's been suggesting that at all.

I think they have.

mumps

Jagraf wrote: »

Peter Kay has done one the opposite way around too, as I recall.

Mitchell and Webb or Peter Kay? What a difficult choice.

mumps

seven-day-weekend wrote: »

I would offer to subsidize you. I wouldn't expect you to sit there with bread and scrape because you couldn't afford anything else.

I doubt the sort of restaurants we were talking about would serve bread and scrape and I would be horribly embarrassed if you offered to subsidize me. I suppose that would work for some people on here because it would ensure we never went out for a meal together again.

Andypandyboy

thorsoak wrote: »

I cannot believe that this thread has attracted almost 2,100 posts!

I've always gone by the mantra "If I invite people, I pay, if I agree to go out with others, we share the bill equally. If I can't afford to share, then I don't go. If people are going to quibble, then I don't go again.

Life's too short to agonise over it.

Well said.:T

missbiggles1

mumps wrote: »

I doubt the sort of restaurants we were talking about would serve bread and scrape and I would be horribly embarrassed if you offered to subsidize me. I suppose that would work for some people on here because it would ensure we never went out for a meal together again.

If you're good friends with someone and they say "Let's go to so and so - my treat", I don't see any reason for anybody to be offended by it. I've occasionally treated friends with less money than we had and still remained friends and I certainly wouldn't be offended if the situation were reversed.