(Closed) To assign seating or not…

posted 9 years ago in Reception
  • poll: Assigned seating or not?
    Assigned tables : (33 votes)
    70 %
    Assigned seats : (6 votes)
    13 %
    Free for all : (8 votes)
    17 %
  • Post # 3
    1084 posts
    Bumble bee
    • Wedding: September 2009

    Are you having a buffet or sit down dinner?  If you’re having the meal served, I’d say assigned seating would make it so much easier, a buffet. . . you’re just kinda risking any stragglers you have feeling out of place, but it all depends on the people and how much room you have.  Like if you have just enough seats then you probably want to do assigned because otherwise you’ll have these random pairings and couples will end up not being able to sit together or friends as the tables get filled up.

    Post # 4
    14186 posts
    Honey Beekeeper
    • Wedding: June 2009

    For taht many people, I say yes. People will end up all over your ballroom, and it’s easier to just group the people together so nobody gets left out or there’s not a “mad dash” to get the best seats or savies for so-and soo

    Post # 6
    1757 posts
    Buzzing bee
    • Wedding: September 2010

    For that large of a guest list, I would at least assign tables. As a guest, I wouldn’t want to end up the only friend at a table full of older family members, or some other equally awkward pairing.

    Post # 7
    5273 posts
    Bee Keeper
    • Wedding: October 2009

    I think one of the best ways to get the best of both worlds is to assign tables, but not seats. This helps keep the people together that you think would get along, and helps prevent a friend that nobody but you knows, sitting in the middle of extended family, that would be awkward! Instead assign that friend to a table with other friends of the same age.

    In My Humble Opinion assigned seating is too cumbersome and too much of a pain, but escort cards (assigned tables) is the way to go. Plus there are sooo many cute way to display escort cards 🙂

    Post # 8
    2634 posts
    Sugar bee

    I having approx 55 guests and right now (it could change!) I’m planning on doing assigned tables!  I have a long time to change my mind – LOL!

    Post # 9
    672 posts
    Busy bee
    • Wedding: November 2009

    At least assign tables, especially for such a large crowd.  Assigned seatign isn’t necessary, but most wedding receptions I’ve been to without any table assignments are pretty chaotic.

    Post # 10
    4001 posts
    Honey bee
    • Wedding: June 2010

    I’d say assign people too.  I always enjoy being placed with people I know and those that I don’t know and getting to know them.  Then again I’m the girl that would strike up a convo with ANYONE.  But I think its best to mix it up a little bit.  So it doesn’t end up being your guests on one side and his on the other.  The assigned seating isn’t necessary, in my opinion, I think it would stress ya out more.

    Post # 11
    1514 posts
    Bumble bee
    • Wedding: August 2009

    I opted for a free for all.  I’d make sure to reserve tables for the family, but after that with the laid-back style and buffet meal, I’d let people chose their own seats.  That’s what I did and I had several compliments from some co-workers that didn’t know anyone else there that they had such a good time talking to so-in-so that was either a family member or friend that they had conversations with at their table.

    Post # 12
    1120 posts
    Bumble bee
    • Wedding: July 2009

    We also wanted a reception that wasn’t overly formal, went with assigning tables but not seats, and it worked out great. There are so many interesting things you can do with the seating cards too to incorporate them into your decorations. We used sand dollars and I’ve seen them in people’s houses we’ve been to since the wedding. 🙂

    Post # 13
    7975 posts
    Bumble Beekeeper

    If I were at a wedding with a bunch of cowboys, especially if I didn’t know many people well, I would waaaaaaay rather have an assigned table. It would be super intimidating for me to have to find a seat among people so different from myself (esp if they’re the group of brawny riled up men the term ‘cowboys’ brings to my mind – a bunch of line backers in flannel slapping each other on the back. oh god am I prejudiced!?), whereas if I have at least an assigned table 1) I’ll know where to go, 2) I’ll have a better chance of chatting with SOMEONE at the table, rather than NO ONE at all, and 3) I’ll trust that I’m seated with people who you think I’ll get along with, knowing that you took the time to do it. It would mean a LOT to me as a guest, since I’m an introvert!

    Post # 14
    1901 posts
    Buzzing bee
    • Wedding: June 2010

    Ok. I have to change my vote. For that many people and a buffet, I would do assigned tables.

    We’re not doing assigned anything but we only have about 35 people and are doing tapas style.

    Post # 15
    94 posts
    Worker bee
    • Wedding: May 2011

    I’ve been to one free for all wedding…trust me you don’t want to go that route. People start saving tables, etc. and it sucks if you’re there and don’t know lots of other people. I would definitely assign tables at a minimum.

    Post # 16
    984 posts
    Busy bee
    • Wedding: April 2010

    We went to a free for all wedding back in August, with some tables reserved for immediate family. It was chaos, we were running around trying to find a group of tables for our family and the rest of the family to sit near us. It wasn’t fun and it seemed very unorganized. I’d say, at least go for the assigned tables so that people aren’t running around trying to find seats together or families ending up seperated.

    The topic ‘To assign seating or not…’ is closed to new replies.

    Find Amazing Vendors