Post # 1
I’m in a pickle.
I bought my wedding dress months ago for a pretty penny at a sale (Maggie Sottero on sale, can’t beat that!). Odd thing was, though, it was nothing like I had in mind. Going in I wanted lace and vintage and possibly a calf-length skirt (no train). I came out with a 3-foot train and TON of tulle and no lace in site. I loved it at the time.
But then I bought my reception dress. I got this dress for literally 90% cheaper than my name brand. And…I LOVE IT. It’s lace and short and no train.
Now I can’t decide!!! Should I try to sell my Maggie and just go with the reception dress? I’m a cheap person so I’m still in shock for spending what I did on Maggie. PLUS it’s going to be another $500 to have it altered. With the reception dress it’d be super cheap since there’s so much less fabric. And I’d be way more comfortable walking around New Orleans for pictures.
What do you think, bees?
The first one is the short reception dress. The second is the Maggie.
Post # 3
I like the Maggie better, but I am no fan of short dressed so I may be biased.
PD. Create a poll, you’ll get more answers.
Post # 4
That Maggie dress is amazing! You should go with what you feel, if the short dress is more you than go for it, its super adorable!
Post # 5
They are soooo different. I think it’s really up to you and the vibe you want to set for your wedding. The are both gorgeous. If it were ME…I’d go with the Maggie.
Post # 6
I love the short reception dress!
Post # 7
What is the theme/overall feeling of your wedding? Would the shorter dress be appropriate? If so, go with the dress you love.
However, I must say the Maggie is stunning.
Post # 8
We’re getting married in a courtyard, so the short one is more “theme” appropriate. Plus, we’ll be walking around the French Quarter in New Orleans for pictures and I’m dreading that Maggie train. It’s so glamorous and I love it for that, but is it worth the money and hassle? I still need it altered and all I think is more $$$.