Other than a vehicle one needs to get to work, borrowing money for depreciable "assets" is not a wise idea. And a wedding isn't even an asset, only a memory.
That is why they get a photographer
My understanding is the white dress means the bride is free of debt.
Would have been a waste of time for us, the reception was at an 1833 inn across the street and 2 buildings over from the church
DD1's reception was under a large canopy in their front yard.
The wedding was at the neighbor's (last of 3 houses on the shared driveway) who had created a "venue" - long expanse of grass down to a largish pond with a "deck". Free Walk to and from.
The DJ was their dance instructor, he also played the "canned" music at the wedding - Free
The (un)officiant was a Canadian university friend of DD. "un" because she isn't "credentialed" to perform weddings but DD and SIL were already officially married via the required paperwork. - Free
DD has worn her dress twice (so far anyway) and that is once more than DW has worn hers. She brought it up to Vermont last week so DW's parents could see it. DW wanted the $1,500 (33 years ago) silk dress. I talked her down to the $800 "single use" dress. It sits vacuum packed somewhere.
We gave DD & SIL money for the wedding and DW's parents gave them a significant amount as well. They paid for the dress and SIL's tux rental, the portable toilets (snazzy 4 unit trailer with A/C and wood cabinetry), the canopy rental, photographers, the "show runner" and the caterer. One of the groomsmen set up the live stream on DD's iPhone. SIL bought materials to make the dance floor (which we helped build) and the sound system, which we put together - 12 speakers we had to figure out how to hang and run wires and power to them. Cleanup on Sunday. I'm quite sure they had more money after the wedding was over than they did before they got married
