- 5 years ago
- Wedding: April 2015
So the future Mr. and myself had thought we had it down where we wanted to get married. Until a second venue entered the running. Both places are castles, which is my FI’s only requirement for our venue. Well that and being able to hold our ceremony and reception in one place. We’ve already visited venue 1 in person together and fell in love with it. It’s secluded in the woods and has a very nice lake on the property. It’s in my hometown which is good for my family and friends who still live in the area. And it’s about 20 minutes from the airport, which is good for us since we’ll be flying in along with my FI’s family. And it includes chiars and tables.
As for the bad, well I feel it’s overpriced at $3,000 for 5 hours. We want the reception, cocktail hour, and ceremony in three different rooms which are about $1k a piece. My Fiance doesn’t like that it regularly hosts up to 5 different weddings simulataneously, and I don’t like their inflexibility with vendors and all the fine print their contract holds.
Now for venue 2, it’s located about a four hour drive from my hometown and a one hour drive away from the nearest airport. So it’ll be a drive either way you look at it. Neither of us has seen it in person, which isn’t ideal. Although I may go visit it this fall. It’s more expensive at $4,000, but we get the entire place to ourselves for 13 hours. Plenty of time to hold a nice wedding. I don’t like that it doesn’t include tables and chairs, but the pricing is still doable for us and won’t break the bank. They’ll also help us with coming up with a wedding day schedule, making up a realistic budget for our wants, and they don’t penalize us for not using their preferred vendors.
So with all that done and said, which do you bees think is the better choice? Right now, we’re torn between the two, with me leaning toward Venue 2 and my fiance being 100% on the fence.