Big rock or big wedding? You choose...

[Mara]

It''s been a while since we had a poll, so here''s one that popped into my head tonite.

Only two choices to make it extra hard to choose

Obviously there''d be reasons why people would choose a or b .... and/or ways to try to get both, but if you just had the strict budget and had to decide what your priorities are (not including what your family would make you do, etc)...what would you WANT to do?




HA HA my answer is obvious I hope.

Plus we got around the bigger wedding by doing destination and its actually turning out to be around 1/2 price over having it locally and we are still inviting everyone. So we did *both* essentially...but I will still choose bigger rock!

Oh and I chose $25k for budget because the US average for weddings spent is around $19-20k. So I bumped it up slightly for poll purposes.

 

[valeria101]

Maybe include a pair of options more: "Spend all on ring & elope" and "No E-ring, get all town to party!".

I am already going for the first!

 

[Mara]

Think of it as....if you want to take it all on the ring, you'd be in the 'bigger rock' category and have a $25 justice of the peace wedding (it's still a wedding!); and if you wanted to spend a tad on the ring and majority on party, get a $100 white gold band w/ miniscule diamonds at a Walmart for the ring and the rest on the wedding and party!

So in essence, your two additional options are still represented here!!

 

[strmrdr]

small rock, small wedding, buy car :}

 

[stephcola]

Hey Mara,




What about this. This was a second marriage for both of us so this is what we (I) opted for. Big ring, and hubby and I went to Hawaii to get married by "Rev. Jim of Weddings the Maui Way". We had our wedding, honeymoon and 2 weeks in Hawaii. The wedding package included a video, a Hawaiin guitar player and Rev. Jim. They even acted as our witnesses. I've had a big wedding and my Hawaiin wedding and I would chose the latter again and again. Especially since it let us have the $$$$ for the rock!. And we were both so unstressed!!!!Each to his own...

 

[tomatoe]

heehee, looks like i voted for the more popular option.

i dislike big weddings and the 'falseness' of having people there that havent seen me since i was a babe in the woods. where i come from, it is very common for couples to register their marriage first (justice of peace) then wait a few years to have the traditional chinese dinner which can have as little as 100-1000 people (or more)! which to me is totally ridiculous, because once u've registered ur marriage = married.

anyway, i had a JOP on our 4th year anniversary day then a small afternoon buffet reception on that week's saturday. thats it! would love to have us$25k to get a big rock!!!

 

[caratgirl]

What a funny poll! I chose the big rock, of course, but really laughed when I saw how many shared that opinion

. We married rather late in life, so it seemed silly to have a big wedding when I was 40. So, small wedding, and I would have preferred to elope to Jamaica, but family was all still alive & kickin' so we had to compromise. Drat. Still dreamin' of Jamaica.

 

[Colored Gemstone Nut]

Hi Mara,




I chose the Big Rock/Small wedding...




I deserve a big rock...Ohh maybe someday...Lol

 

[Mara]

Wow I guess this poll is really hands down a big rock, small wedding kind of affair

Steph, your scenario is definitely big rock, small wedding. I didn't specify 'small wedding'...it could be you and your hubby, or you and your hubby and 10 guests, or 20 or 30. But it's still a small wedding

Personally myself I am not a huge wedding person, so even if I wasn't a diamond person, it would be choice A for me

Oh and Josh--you HAVE a big rock!! A few if I recall correctly!

 

[canadiangrrl]

Voted for smaller rock, bigger wedding, since that's what we're doing.

Our guest list is currently at 172. I'm praying that they all don't show up.

 

[diamondlil]

Definitely big rock and small, imtimate wedding. I had the big wedding nearly 18 years ago because that's what people did at the time. Looking back now, I would want something more personal with only the closest of family and friends.




Diamondlil

 

[fire&ice]

You'll know me. I'd figure out a way to sort of have both. That said, weddings can be such a rip off. One really needs to not go crazy & become bridezilla. I've mentioned this before. My initial quote for my wedding bouquet was over 1k. WHAT?????? The florist had some dopey imported rare orchids in it. Heck, they are just going to die & I'm allergic/sensitive to flowers.

I did vote for the bigger rock - smaller wedding. The rock will always be there. My wedding is a faded memory.

 

[MichelleCarmen]

My husband and I eloped and if we had to do it again, we'd elope again! I didn't get a BIG rock, though, but a pretty one

Michelle

 

[song]

For the sake of voting in this poll, I chose big rock, small wedding although I would do it the same way I did 26 years ago. Which is, no rock, elope to Vegas, own home and have it paid off by the time I hit 40.

Waiting this long for the stone of my dreams was easy when the kids were young. Now that I have more time on my hands for me, it's even sweeter owning 2 gorgeous rocks that signify a lifetime of commitment and a home I can call my own.

 

[canadiangrrl]

Our point of view is this - we have a great deal of friends & family all over the US and Canada, and it's not often that we get the chance to see many of them. We felt that our wedding would provide a great opportunity for everyone to get together from all corners and have a blast.

I had the traditional wedding at the age of 21. Mr. Canadiangrrl, who was also previously married, did not. He had a very small civil ceremony & reception, and this time out, he wants his family & friends to share in the event.

 

[oldminer]

I vote for the big wedding and smaller diamond. You can always buy a larger stone for an important anniversary present, but you can only marry the first time ONCE. A second or thrid marraige may require the big stone and the "intimate" sort of wedding since you have already had your opportunity before, but for a first timer, the BIG Wedding is going to be a ton of fun for you, your family and your friends. Those memories, like diamonds, do last forever.....

While it is not a rule written in stone, I'd say the important three or four main social events of your life are more important than material items. Life is temporal, events are fleeting. You can always buy more and bigger "stuff" anytime you want. You can only have a few great events in an entire lifetime. Might as well enjoy them.

 

[fire&ice]

For all practical purposes, Canadiangrrl, seems like you have a big rock & are having the big wedding.

While we are on the subject, I think I would buy a reasonable size stone, have a medium size - not lavish but nice wedding & bank the rest.

At the time, I didn't have the choice about a larger rock b/c hubby was a starving grad. student. My parents paid for the wedding. You may recall, they gave me x amount. We could pocket whatever we saved. It was that extra money that we were able to buy our first home, flip it w/ renovation & build an Architect designed

well appointed dream home at a young age.

 

[fire&ice]

----------------
On 11/23/2003 3:40:42 PM oldminer wrote:

the BIG Wedding is going to be a ton of fun for you, your family and your friends. Those memories, like diamonds, do last forever.....
------------

Perhaps it is the definition of a big wedding. I do have fond memories of my wedding. But, over the years it has become a blur. It was one day, albeit a very important day, but *one* day. Most of all it was the things at the wedding that didn't cost much that meant the most. Like a photo capturing one of hubby's frat. brothers stuffing shrimp in his pocket (he still catches grief to this day). Doing the traditional dance w/ my father & him having the band play a lindy. I certainly didn't miss those dopey imported orchids at over 100 a pop. I remember throwing my less expensive (roses, daisies, baby's breath & cornflower) bouquet and a photo snipet of all of them grasping for it. With an equally fun snipet of the "boys" dashing from the garter. None of these memories cost more than the nice, medium size wedding we had. Funny, the only thing that cost a premium was my wedding portrait. It hangs my parents house w/ a copy on my wall. It doesn't fill me with joy like the candid photo album taken by a fashion photographer or the pics my friends took at the wedding & wedding related events from there own dopey kodaks.

I know I spent less on our wedding than many of my friends did. Mine comes up in conversation as a hall of famer for fun. So, I think we can't focus on cost as being a "big wedding."

 

[Roxy]

I voted for big rock, small wedding, but we actually went the route of a medium rock/medium wedding.

As Oldminer pointed out, you can always upgrade to a bigger rock later, which is what we plan to do next year.

 

[Roxy]

Sorry for the second post, but what defines a small, medium and large (big) rock??

Mara, since this is your poll, how do you define those sizes just so we're all on the same "page".

 

[abbey]

I agree 100% with old miner!
The day was so important to me and it was everything I wanted with my friends and family. We are working on upgrading now after 5 years and there is no way I would have done it differently!

 

[Mara]

Hee Hee Roxy--well I don't want to be specific because my idea of a small rock may be someone's idea of a big rock!!

I wanted to see what everyone said and their thoughts on what they would do...without getting into size specifics. For some people 1ct is huge...just as for some people 100 people at a wedding is huge (that would be me).




I have been to larger weddings and I have friends who have thrown them. You are so stressed trying to talk to everyone that you can't even enjoy or remember important things. So we opted for smaller wedding...would have regardless of the $$$ or the rock size...but everyone has different priorities.




I just recall one of my friends at her wedding with 90-100 people last year, sweating up a storm in her too hot dress, and looking stressed. The wedding was beautiful--but she looked harried. She said after that she felt they couldn't spend enough time with people and that was upsetting her. That isn't how I would like to be remembered.

Our wedding in Hawaii was partially setup the way it was to let everyone spend time with each other beforehand so that wedding event itself isn't AS big of a deal--its just like a big party. Then again I've never been a huge hullabaloo wedding type gal. I'm a close-friend type person, as is Greg. So it's just another event in our lives with friends and family. A very fun event...with a few cool rings.

 

[Roxy]

I agree with you on both points - size is subjective and it really all comes down to priorities.

It was actually F&I's post re Canadiangrrl's ring being a "big rock" that got me thinking about what "big" really is, so I wondered what folks considered to be big around here.

I'm a "big rock" gal, who aspires to one day wear an ice rink on my finger (as my cousin calls large stones).

That day is quite a ways out in my future, but I'm already planning my stepping-stone upgrades (hee hee).

I think that whatever constitutes your "dream" wedding - go for it! You're going to relive the memories of your wedding day over and over again, and you want those memories to bring you joy not regret.

You and Greg have the right idea. You want to have a great celebration, but you don't want to lose site of what you're celebrating - family, friends, and marriage to the one person who means more to you than yourself.

 

[Mara]

Hee Hee Roxy...yes I am a large stone girl...I am definitely aspiring to that great 3c rock at some point in the future. That is my 'rock dream'. Anything bigger probably not, though ask me in about 10 more years! Stepping stones are good in the meantime!

 

[jenibear]

Hmmmmm

I voted for smaller rock big wedding - cause that's what we're having - I think.

My ring is a 1 ct. center and .80 sidestones - to many people big, but to me average. And my wedding band will have another 1 ct in stones.

I dream of a 2.5 or 3 ct princess down the road but didn't want to skimp on the wedding to get that. Because my poor honey wouldn't benefit from that at all!

We're having 150 people - to many people big but, again, to us average.

I have the same feelings as canadiangrrl - my family is out of state and we both have tonz of friends out of state so this wedding is probably the only chance in our lives to have everyone meet everyone and see all the people we love in one place.

Since I don't expect to spend time with everyone other than the obligatory table visit, I don't think I'll be harried.
I'll be stuck to the side of my new husband anyway!!!

 

[canadiangrrl]

I had more than 100 people at my first wedding. Didn't feel harried - had a great time.

My stone might be considered "big", but it's an I1 stone. 172 people (or whatever the hell the list is up to now) might seem like a lot, but we're getting married in my fiance's hometown, which is a relatively small town in Maryland - and the cost of the reception is markedly less expensive than in the DC metro region. The point I'm trying to make is that there are ways of having your big wedding and big rock, without completely breaking the bank.

I have no Martha Stewart-type illusions about the perfect day - I'm not that much of a control freak.

We just want everyone to have fun, and remember our wedding with pleasure.

 

[Hest88]

I'm not sure if I can vote, since I know that Mara's idea of a big rock is too big for me! If I had these parameters when I got married, I'd have chosen a stone somewhat more expensive than what I have now, and maybe upgraded the quality but not the size of the wedding. I could have chosen a more expensive dress and not have had to run my friends ragged creating the perfect decorations, and upgraded the food, and hired a different set of musicians. I would not have had a bigger bash, though. I had a small number of people at my wedding--inviting only the people we truly wanted--and a much larger Chinese banquet. The number and composition of the guests in both cases were ideal for the circumstances.

 

[ringbling17]

I chose big rock, small wedding.
When I got married, I had NO rock and a big wedding. We didn't really have a budget for the wedding. We spent $15k in total, but that was also 10 years ago, and nothing ever gets cheaper, does it? The money was given to us as a gift by my parents, but we wound up giving them half of it back after we got the money from all the gifts we received.
If I had to do it all over again, with the budget that you posted, I could have had both the big ring and the big wedding. I would spend $15K on the wedding and $10K on the ring. I think for $10k, I could get a fairly large ring, at least a 1.25 carat. For a first diamond, I think that size is great and very big in my opinion.
Yes, I know that I recently got a 2 carat, but that was also a 10 year anniversary gift and remember, I didn't get a first diamond. Plus, my .75 OMC is very shallow and looks at least 1 carat, so I figure I had to get something much bigger. Not to mention the whole shrinkage thing.

 

[Mara]

Hest, please do vote...part of the reason I didn't put a specific size for 'big rock' vs 'small rock' is because everyone's perception of size is different.

 

[ccuheartnurse]

I voted big rock/small wedding. As size varies to personal perception, so does the guest list (in my opinion). My fiance & I are **both** Italian. Thats not super major unless all sets of parents are immigrants to Canada & have a zillion friends/family (that you never see!). So, the compromise, 225 people (not the 425 thats customary) & a larger stone.

Sometimes it doesnt matter how old you are, you have familial obligations & cultural expectations that you just cant beat.

Judy



**thank goodness for 100% trade-up policy. I'm going for 2ct plus in about 20yrs.