michelleb148
Just Said Yes May 2015

Engagement: 10 months or 22 months?

michelleb148, on August 7, 2014 at 5:17 PM

Posted in Planning 66

Hi all! I'm new Wedding Wire, but I thought this would be a good place to get some immediate advice. I got engaged 2 weeks ago to my boyfriend of over 10 years. I have always dreamed of a Spring wedding, so now I'm a bit stuck - do I go with Spring 2015 or 2016? I feel 2015 would be rush and I would...

Hi all! I'm new Wedding Wire, but I thought this would be a good place to get some immediate advice. I got engaged 2 weeks ago to my boyfriend of over 10 years. I have always dreamed of a Spring wedding, so now I'm a bit stuck - do I go with Spring 2015 or 2016? I feel 2015 would be rush and I would have to get started right away, but 2016 seems so far away and I'm concerned about what our grandparents' health might be over a year from now. Any thoughts/advice is much appreciated!

66 Comments

  • KR
    Super September 2014
    KR ·

    Definitely 10. I had a year and I wish it had been shorter...two years would be so much more stress and overthinking!!!

  • WalkerGirl
    Super August 2014
    WalkerGirl ·

    We were in (sort of) a similar situation. Got engaged Oct 2012 andFH was starting his MBA program in March '13. He did not want to get married while in school, so we had to decide if we wanted a shotgun wedding, planned in 4 months, or a long drawn out engagement of 22 months. We opted for the longer engagement. At times the wait was annoying, but I can honestly say the most stressing I did over the wedding was last night when I was figuring out the nitty gritty details of today (rehearsal dinner). I loved knowing I had all the time in the world to plan. As much as the wait sucked. I'm glad we went with the longer engagement because I actually really enjoyed the wedding planning process, and I know if I were short on time I wouldn't have enjoyed it as much.

  • StitchingBride
    Master October 2014
    StitchingBride ·

    I vote for the later. but it depends. if you already have a venue, or if it looks like the one you want is available in 10 months, so go ahead. but since so many venues that people want seem to need more than a year, 10 months may not be enough.

    and the dress- if you want to take time to look and then have enough time to order comfortable for any type of dress you may want, then 10 months terrifies me. Had I ordered a dress I probably would have placed the order no later than 10 months.

    you need to decide what to do , but in most planning I've seen it's the venue that seems to be what requires the most time in the end.

  • Future Mrs Yocum
    Expert November 2014
    Future Mrs Yocum ·

    We had somewhat of a similar choice and chose 10 months (at first my fiance thought it would be possible to do 5 months for a big wedding- no way, mister!). I like it this way because I'm impatient but definitely realize you'll need to put everything together real quick and book vendors ASAP. We got engaged in January and I was busy with planning until about April and then got a break mostly until now, when everything is picking up again. I like it that way and could never wait over a year so that's my vote!

  • Pancakes
    Master October 2015
    Pancakes ·

    I vote 2016! If you choose 2015 you get the leftover vendors that no one else has booked, yet. And you are rushing with other planning things. If you do 2016 you get the top pick of vendors and you can plan as you want, not rush every day. Just my opinion!

  • Sally
    Super October 2014
    Sally ·

    We did 18 month engagement, but didn't start REALLY planning til about 10-11 months in. I wish we were already married a long time ago, honestly! If I could go back and change it I would! But we wanted to buy a house first that was really the major reason why we waited, if it wasn't for that we would have gotten married a LOT sooner so I say do 10 months on yours!

  • Diana
    Super August 2015
    Diana ·

    There are lots of comments here and this might have already been said but.. I had a similar choice: August 2014 (would have been an 8 month engagement) or August 2015 (20 month engagement). Ultimately, because we are paying for the wedding ourselves, we choice to wait and save the money so we could really have what we wanted. We are on month 8 of 20 and while I sometimes wish it was closer, I couldn't imagine getting married in less than a week!

  • Kaesey
    Super August 2014
    Kaesey ·

    10 months is actually a lot of time. By the time we are married we would have had an almost 9 month engagement and I dying to get it over with and just be married. Figure out your budget, then make a rough guest list and book a venue ASAP that fits such criteria. Everything else is gravy and have plenty of time.Depending on your venue they may be all inclusive therefore you just deal with them and walla you have a wedding ready for Spring

  • SarahJ
    Expert October 2014
    SarahJ ·

    We have been together 5yrs but the time we got engaged. So we planned our wedding in under 6mths. I think if you can get a venue soon, the rest will fall into place. At this point I appreciate the fact we had a short engagement, as Suzanne said you don't have time to second guess anything.

  • KaylaP
    VIP September 2014
    KaylaP ·

    We got engaged December 2013 and our wedding is September 2014. It's possible.

  • Kate
    Master May 2012
    Kate ·

    10 months is plenty of time--do it sooner if all else is equal! And health of older people is a very legitimate concern: both my mom's parents have passed, and I would have loved for them to be here for my wedding.

    ETA: My brother and SIL were engaged just over three months and they had a gorgeous, perfect, DIY-ed wedding, she just didn't do much else those months. FH and I have an 8 month engagement that is utterly dragging, and we have way more time than we need, and that is with both of us working full time, him having his own computer repair business on the side, and me going to school at night. Now I'm mostly bored and waiting for the wedding. If you're an organized person, you absolutely do not need years and years. Of course, if you want to be engaged and if you would enjoy planning for years, that is different. But I hate parties, so planning one for months is a special kind of torture. I would much rather be done with it and be married!

  • Mindy
    Dedicated August 2015
    Mindy ·

    As everyone has said, but I'll throw my two cents in...it is really about what will work best for you guys regardless of other considerations. If you can get a venue, 10 months is completely doable. Our engagement is long (20 months) because I wanted to finish my MPA program before I had to do too much planning (I'll be done at the end of November). Sometimes is sucks because I just want to jump right in, other times the long time has been and feels great. We had been together 7 years before we got engaged so for us we didn't really feel a rush to get to the wedding. We want to enjoy this time, plan something special and celebrate when we feel relaxed and ready.

    Congrats!

  • Ashleigh
    Master November 2013
    Ashleigh ·

    If you have the money to pay for it now, go 10 months, it can be done! If you don't have the money, go 22 months to give you time to save.

    We had a 19 month engagement and it seemed like FOREVER! Thinking about a wedding for 19 months was exhausting, just too much time, for me.

  • MrsLaguna
    VIP April 2015
    MrsLaguna ·

    I would do spring 2015 mine is April next year. I got engaged last September and I've felt its so long if I would've had the money I would have gotten married this year. Even though time flies I only have 8 months left. If you can't do April why don't you consider a fall wedding?

  • F
    Devoted January 2015
    Future Bride ·

    I have several friends who have planned the wedding of their dreams in 3 months! So 10 months is more than enough time.

  • kahlcara
    Master August 2013
    kahlcara ·

    We were engaged for 2 and a half years, but didn't start planning our wedding until about 9 months beforehand (and we lived 300 miles away from where we got married). I was working 2 jobs and DH was in school full-time and working, so it was stressful but definitely doable. I vote 10 months, unless you need the extra time to save up.

  • Chasity
    VIP June 2015
    Chasity ·

    There are a lot of variables. Are you all going to be paying for it yourself? If so I think I would say the longer engagement so that you have time to save the money. I have been engaged for 1.5 years and I can honestly say I am thankful for it. We haven't had to rush anything, budget wise or any choices. I am still in college and so are all but one of my bridesmaids so it has made things easier on us. I think it depends a lot on what is going on in your life.

  • C
    Dedicated August 2014
    Cathy McDaniel ·

    Definitely 2015!!!

    Let us know what u decide!!

  • M
    Master December 2014
    Melissa ·

    I was in the same exact situation as you. His grandma got sick and was in the hospital, now she's better but asked us to push the wedding to this year so we did instead of doing it in 2016 like we wanted. We are definitely regretting that decision and feeling the pressure to come up with thousands of dollars. If you have the money to do the wedding next year Id say go for it but if not definitely don't add extra stress onto yourself. It's not worth it. You guys have waited this long to get engaged. What's another year or two to get married Lol

  • Donna
    Super September 2014
    Donna ·

    We did 6 months because my FH did not want to wait. He promised to increase the budget if need be so we could get married this year.

    Luckily we found the perfect venue but I chose a Friday to make it happen. All of the rest was totally doable and we are having a beautiful wine country wedding in 3 weeks from now!

Comment on this discussion

×