I'm not asking to stir the pot, I promise! Where I am from drink tickets or "toonie" bars are very, very common. I've never been to a wedding that hasn't at some point switched over to cash or given out X amount of free tickets and then if the guests would like to drink more, they pay however much per drink.
I understand why some people feel a fully hosted open bar is the only option, and I understand why a fully cash bar with no drinks provided can be considered tacky. It's the in between options I don't understand being less "tacky" than providing guests with X amount of free drinks and allowing them to continue drinking beyond that if they want at their cost (or partial cost in most cases).
Limited bars can exclude drinkers like myself. So some guests may not get any alcohol.
Capped bars ($1500 alcohol cap before bar shuts down), basically gives everyone X amount of free drinks before they're just all cut off and the booze is gone.
Timed bar (1 hour of alcohol service, or 2) again just cuts people off whether they want to keep drinking or not.
I guess I don't see how excluding some drinkers is okay, or cutting people off after X amount of money or time is OK, but giving 2 free drinks of whatever someone wants and then having the opportunity to pay (partial or full) if they want more than what's being provided by the hosts, is not okay?
Is it the difference between wedding types? I've noticed a lot of people here go out for "after parties" where I assume people then pay their own way (?) if they choose to join - here receptions usually run until last call (1 or 2am), so no need for an after party at a different location.
Can some of you who are more familiar with the other options explain to me why they're better etiquette wise than providing X amount of free before switching to some form of cash?
