Super Honeymoon Homepage

Question: Why have a lavish wedding when you can spend it on a super honeymoon ?

(Posted by: dave777 on 2007-07-10 22:10:44)

> > > > > > > < < < < < < < 'Better yet, why a lavish wedding when you can spend in on a house?? " reply > > > great idea ! > > > > > > > < < < < < < < > > > > > > > < < < < < < < "A honeymoon would be good, but the 60 % that will end up divorced shoild just put the money in two separate bank accounts to make it easier to split things up later. That would cheat the attorneys out of the fee for the property battle. " reply > > > Me thinks newlyweds think that it will never happen to them. We know better. Good suggestion. > > > > > > > < < < < < < <

Posted by: choccay on 2007-07-10, 22:14:40

In many ways a wedding is more special, because you can share it with your friends. But I do agree that many brides go overboard and spend way too much on a reception that would've been just as fun if they'd spent less.

Posted by: LovePink222 on 2007-07-10, 22:17:14

I'd rather do the opposite. I love going on vacation, but I only do it once every few years. I'd rather have a lavish wedding b/ c I believe in entertaining your guests well when you invite them to your party. In addition, I would rather have a reception w/ the food I love, the dress I wanted and nice pictures; then going to the beach for 5 days. Vacations are great. But, I would remember my wedding day for longer then the vacation. Plus, spending tons of money on a vacation is stupid. I've been on vacations were I've stayed in an all inclusive hotel, w/ all day open bar, all my meals included, a suite w/ a mini fridge, and all my activities included. That cost me 1K for 5 days, that included all air fare and transportation. The place we stayed was beautiful. So, I think I would rather spend 2K for two people, then 5K. I'd use the other 3K for my wedding.

Posted by: mrszorola on 2007-07-10, 22:23:27

Better yet, why a lavish wedding when you can spend in on a house??

Posted by: Eagle Woman on 2007-07-10, 22:53:54

A honeymoon would be good, but the 60% that will end up divorced should just put the money in two separate bank accounts to make it easier to split things up later. That would cheat the attorneys out of the fee for the property battle.

Posted by: turtle on 2007-07-10, 23:39:34

Well, a wedding is a party the bride's parents give for friends and family. All you get is some gifts and money, but definitely not a down payment on a house. I would go for the house, it's an investment and will serve to further you financially in the future. A honeymoon is like a vacation to me, it lasts for a week and then it's over forever, at least geographically speaking.

Posted by: gardennnome on 2007-07-11, 00:36:06

Hi there i think its not how much you spend on your wedding, its the people there that make the day special for you and your future hubby. if you have any relos that winge and complain, (im european and they like big wedding but that aint happening with me when i get married) tell them to get stuffed or get them to pay!

Posted by: sparkleythings_4you on 2007-07-11, 00:49:15

Having a cheap wedding does not always mean you have more to spend on a honeymoon or a house, we are having a cheap wedding and no honeymoon, because we don't have the money for either a big wedding or a big honeymoon.

Posted by: RowerGirl on 2007-07-11, 04:57:40

To some people the wedding is more important than the honeymoon! I, however, would agree with you and choose a nicer honeymoon (I love to travel) over a huge wedding any day! Or, putting the extra money down on a home.

Posted by: Lydia on 2007-07-11, 06:18:37

Our wedding wasn't 'lavish', but we hosted a wonderful day for our guests. We had NO honeymoon, but put our savings into the wedding, instead. It was our choice, obviously, because we planned a beautiful traditional church ceremony, with a lovely dinner, reception, dance, and full open bar for which we hosted about 200 guests. We wanted to celebrate with all of our family and friends as we began our new life together.