Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

Weddings abroad

285 replies

FreeWee · 02/10/2013 18:05

Is it just me or are they an excuse to shift the cost of a wedding onto the guests, away from the hosts, the bride and groom? DH is best man at one next year, chosen because the bride and groom can't afford a wedding in the UK apparently. But we can't really afford to go abroad with our DD when DH will have been in full time education for a year. AIBU?

OP posts:
ZingWantsCake · 04/10/2013 21:11

in fact I have been to weddings in UK, Hungary, Holland, Germany and Belgium, several times - not once did the newlyweds pay for our trips or hotel!Confused

we fucked that up big time, didn't we?Grin

ZingWantsCake · 04/10/2013 21:14

bear
not all of it, just the last few posts every time I refreshed thread.

I might now. Although I do need dinner while watching Fraiser...I have a feeling I'd just get annoyed otherwise unnecessarily. Wink

Threalamandaclarke · 04/10/2013 21:14

Zing OP was being asked to pay an amount that would cover half the accommodation costs whilst using only a fifth of the accommodation.
I think.

But even if that weren't the case it seems like it's too expensive.
It's really ok to decline. I think ppl expect it for an overseas wedding.

Threalamandaclarke · 04/10/2013 21:17

Ah you won't get annoyed Zing
You're right. It's not customary for B&G to pay for guests' accommodation. But it's more expensive for guests to attend overseas.

Threalamandaclarke · 04/10/2013 21:19

I need to go to bed though. Must get my 45 minutes Grin

ZingWantsCake · 04/10/2013 21:22

thanks Ams

that is an odd arrangement.

sleep well, dream of Nolan!Grin

Threalamandaclarke · 04/10/2013 21:41
expatinscotland · 04/10/2013 21:54

We had to do that with ex h's brother. His wife was totally minted and all their friends. And they chose to have this wedding on some compound abroad where you had to stay on that compound or it was dangerous.

We had just bought a house and were working flat out to pay off his student loan debt as one of our cars (in a foreign country where you needed two cars) was about to blow. We would need to get a car loan soon enough.

This thing was a fucking fortune.

Ex h hemmed and hawed. I told him, 'We can just afford the flights,' (oh, yes, they had it over Thanksgiving week/weekend when the cost of travel was through the fecking roof), but we literally can't afford to stay there.

You tell them or me.

So he told his brother. Who shrugged and said, 'No problem. I'll tell future FIL).' The man owned several apartments on the compound and was like, 'Why didn't you say. Here, have an apartment.'

We'd have got thousands in debt for pride.

Fuck that!

Original poster
FreeWee · 04/10/2013 22:15

Apologies to clarify. The venue costs (say for easy maths) £10k for exclusive hire for a week. It has 5 rooms so 10 people. Half of the venue hire cost (in this example £5k) has been split between the 5 rooms. So guests have been texted to say 'You're invited and on the A list for accommodation. It will cost £1k per couple. Please let us know if you want to stay there' (not direct cut and paste. Paraphrasing) So I've interpreted it as the b&g passing on costs to guests and wondering if I'm being unreasonable.

OP posts:
Threalamandaclarke · 04/10/2013 22:29

Oh. £1k to stay there for how long?
Because that isn't the same as I read it earlier. And it means that the B&G are paying a further 5k for the actual wedding.
I'm not sure that's passing on the cost tbh. It's just that they want to get the bookings sorted so that ppl don't miss out.
But I still wouldn't go in your position.

theoriginalandbestrookie · 04/10/2013 22:29

Everything about having a wedding abroad and automatically expecting that people will pay for flights to attend is unreasonable. The venue is just the icing on the cake.

Look OP just tell them you can't afford it.

Bearbehind · 04/10/2013 23:20

I'm not sure I follow threal's logic on them not passing the costs on.

The venue, in this example is £10k, they are only paying £5k and expecting the guests to stump up the other £5k.

How is that not passing the costs on?

The guests have no choice in their accommodation and presumably, if no one else paid, the B&G would have to fork out £10k.

LadyHarrietdeSpook · 04/10/2013 23:47

A GRAND?!

Original poster
FreeWee · 05/10/2013 07:39

Apologies for more confusion! The amounts were examples for easy maths! Essentially the bride and groom seem to have halved the venue cost then divided it by the number of rooms. So if it was £1k to hire the venue they've said let's charge our guests £100 per room for the week (5 rooms x £100 = £500, half the venue cost). If the venue hire is exclusive then whether the rooms were filled or not they would have to pay so by filling the rooms they pass some of the costs of venue hire onto the guests.

OP posts:
Threalamandaclarke · 05/10/2013 07:41

Well, if you marry in the uk and guests stay overnight, the guests have to pay for their accommodation don't they? That's not consodered to be passing on the cost.
Lots of weddings in hotels for example would involve guests staying at the wedding venue. Do most couples pay for their guests overnight stays? If so, then my point is erroneous of course.
But I do agree that that weddings abroad usually involve a smaller cost to the b&g and a greater cost to the guests than a wedding at home. Obviously the travel is more expensive. But also, if I married at a report in Jamaica it would cost me about £5k for a two week (effectively my honeymoon) and the actual wedding, might well cost less than a grand. Even including a cake and some catering for the guests. Each guest would be paying thousands just to attend. So the B&G get a "dream wedding" and their honeymoon for a little over the cost of the honeymoon because the guests are paying to be at the resort.
In a uk hotel wedding the guests might pay £100 - £300 for an overnight stay in the venue hotel. Or they could stay in another venue or drive or cab home. Much less cost. The B&G would be paying seval thousand pounds just for the doing. The cost of the guests' accommodation is pretty much seperate from the wedding stuff. And of course this does not include their honeymoon.
So an pvseas wedding does, in many ways pass on a cost to the guests but that is not the same as suggesting that the guests are supplementing the venue cost. They could stay elsewhere but still attend the wedding. This isn't usually possible at an all inclusive Caribbean type resort because of the nature of the areas surrounding these reports. IYSWIM.

Threalamandaclarke · 05/10/2013 07:45

But you don't know what the normal room rate is.
Or do you? It could be that that's how the venue divide it.

humphryscorner · 05/10/2013 07:46

Haven't read all the thread as l

humphryscorner · 05/10/2013 07:48

Posted too early!

I've been to a few weddings abroad. Loved them. No one was forced to go.
If you don't want to go .... Don't .

Threalamandaclarke · 05/10/2013 07:50

For comparison, dh and I married in the uk at an hotel.
We paid for the registrar, venue, catering etc and then guests paid separately for their rooms. Some guests stayed elsewhere, some were driven home. But we could have paid all up front for all the rooms (we needed them all as lots of ppl water to stay there). If we had paid all up front and divided the cost between the guests the it might look like western recouping wedding costs. But really we would have just been securing their accommodation and they would have paid us rather than the venue.

Original poster
FreeWee · 05/10/2013 07:51

Yes bear because of how few rooms there are they know they'll fill them; whether by the A list or not. So they know they'll be able to recoup some of the venue costs from reselling the rooms. Other weddings I've heard of there are some rooms included in the venue hire and these rooms are given to special guests like parents, best man, bridesmaids etc. I've not (in my limited research asking people) come across anyone who sold those rooms to those people to recoup some venue hire costs.

OP posts:
Threalamandaclarke · 05/10/2013 07:53

I think the issue here is that it's just too expensive for you right now. I am guessing that a couple of years ago that wouldn't have been the case and you've not all caught up with your altered financial status.
Hence my personal view that you might be best to decline.

Original poster
FreeWee · 05/10/2013 07:56

This venue can only be hired with exclusive use. Think large self catering cottage (it's not this is an example!!). You hire the whole place not just a few bedrooms. And the price is the same regardless of how many bedrooms you fill. It ranges from X in low season to Y in high season on the website. Dividing the high season price by the number of rooms you get almost exactly 50% of the venue hire price. If you get married in a hotel, the hotel could sell their rooms to anyone not just wedding guests so the b&g are not liable to fill them all or pay for them themselves. We reserved a block at the hotel we married at which needed to be booked by a certain date or they were released to the public. We sent this info on the invites. Other people non wedding guests were staying there while we were.

OP posts:
Threalamandaclarke · 05/10/2013 08:00

I understand.but that's still not the same as passing on the cost IMHO.
Other than the obvious issues I mentioned about marrying in a destination wedding.
You can just stay elsewhere. It will still be too expensive. Because it's overseas and you have to fly and stay more than one night.

bakingaddict · 05/10/2013 08:10

So what's really happening is that the B&G are contributing to half the accommodation costs and the other half of the cost is to be split 5 ways between the couples staying in the rooms. So if my maths is correct 50% paid by B&G, 50%/5 equalling 10% of the overall accommodation cost to be covered by you. Sounds a good deal to me, not quite sure what you are grumbling about!

When me and DH go to weddings we usually have to pay 100% of the accommodation costs. If you really cant afford it then don't go but you seem to making yourself out to be some kind of martyr to this wedding when I think the B&G are doing a nice gesture by paying most of the hotel costs

Original poster
FreeWee · 05/10/2013 08:20

real yes it is mainly that. But also that they are doing it abroad so they save money at a time when we really, really can't afford to do it. And I feel they're keeping their budget down by passing on costs to guests who in the main can afford it except for us. And the bride being as blinkered as she is hasn't cottoned on to the fact that for the next year money is tight for us and expects us to attend a wedding abroad with all its associated costs in a place we wouldn't choose to go on holiday even if we had the money, which we don't, which will end up costing us even more if we choose to try and make a holiday of it and stay elsewhere for a week (not her problem but might have been foreseen perhaps when realising this venue will have nothing for a 18 month old) I don't know why I expected a bride to be considerate really reading some of the threads on here!

OP posts: