Post # 1
We are invited to a wedding that has two receptions. One of the receptions is right after the wedding and will include a meal. The other reception is several hours later and will only have cake (no meal). Everyone is invited to the 2nd reception, but only a select few are invited to the first one.
What do you think? I’ve never heard of anyone doing this and it seems quite rude and tacky.
Post # 3
@bridewannabe2014: It’s called a tiered reception. Apparently they are common in the UK according to some of the women here. I think it’s appalling when done in the US. You should host all of your guests equally or cut down the guest list.
Post # 4
I have heard of this actually, although it isn’t typically advertisted to those guests not invited to all the receptions. Some couples don’t have a reception at all for some guests and instead invite certain guests to return later for a light meal and cake (or similar).
I don’t know if I would call it rude and I certainly wouldn’t call it tacky. I see it as a way to meet budgetary concerns for those that don’t have a huge budget but want to try and include everyone as best as they can. Now to be fair I haven’t ever been one of those not invited to the seperate reception (that I know of) and if I were to be not included I might feel otherwise, who knows.
Post # 5
I never knew these types of receptions existed but I am not going to say it’s tacky or rude. Really just depends on your social circle or culture. I guess if I found out I hadn’t been invited to the reception with themeal, I’d feel slighted but I’d still feel honored to have been invited to the wedding at all. And I love cake.
I personally wouldn’t do it though… I mean maybe having a celebration on a different day that is less expensive (like a homecooked meal or BBQ) to include everyone would be better I think than having an A and B reception.
Post # 6
That is horrible! and so so tacky! I really don’t know why people think this is okay just a say a little bit of cash. I tell you what I would do, I wouldn’t be caught dead at that wedding.
Post # 7
I posted on your other thread. I suggested that maybe she needs to change the order and do the cake and punch reception first and then do the dinner. This way those who are only invited to the cake reception can just go home afterwards and then everyone else proceeds to the dinner. The food order would then be backwards but what do they expect people who arent invited to the dinner beforehand to do until the cake reception??
Post # 8
It seems rude but if it’s part of the couples culture it fine. However if you can’t afford to host x number of people, then don’t invite them to the wedding. Or have a causal bbq later. Perhaps host a cake and punch, appeitizer reception for everyone.
Post # 9
We were inivited to a wedding like this once. We didn’t know it when we accepted the invitation that there was to be meals for most people and just an invite to the party part afterwards for others. Had we known this we surely would have declined; saved 5 hours of driving and just sent a gift. We didn’t figure out that there was a meal until I asked the rest of his family what they were going to do with the 5 hours in between the ceremony and reception and where we should go for supper. They looked at me like I had 2 heads. Then they were ticked off for us; that we had come all this way and were not invited for the meal Both my fiancee and I felt really awkward and put out by this. I understand the need to keep costs down; but it felt to me like a gift grab.