It’s almost like you’re saying wedding receptions don’t need at least a few drunks making asses of themselves on the dance floor. This can’t be what you mean, so you should clarify your position. |
Tacky and cheap and I always wonder how people justify it to themselves. |
People in Boston are heavy, drinkers, true to stereotype. It’s strategy to prevent excessive drunkenness – that’s it! Our wedding venue, a lovely colonial country inn actually forbad us from having an open bar even though we were sedate and in our 30s
We did provide unlimited white and red wine, soft drinks, and champagne, however |
Extremely common in New England. |
Or maybe even Revere! |
+1. Gotta reign in the Irish |
+1 |
Was it disclosed on the wedding invitation? I've been to a wedding with no alcohol (religious reasons) but it was explicitly stated on the wedding invite. At least lets you know ahead of time. |
Totally disagree. I'd prefer a cash bar to no alcohol. |
Very tacky.
But the ways of proper hosting have long gone by the wayside. They should be hosting appropriately and not encouraging a tiered or pay to play event. Asking your guests to open their wallet at YOUR wedding is so tacky. |
Not ideal but I only drink a couple drinks so it’s not going to upset me. Drinking is optional and they could have just not had any, which would be worse imo. |
Get a second job for 6 months to pay for the alcohol served.
Cash bar is very tacky. |