If I had the choice, I would definitely take the money for a house instead of for a wedding. I’m not at all a big wedding person, I go to friend’s weddings out of social obligation not because I’m super excited about going to weddings. I’m single, but I’ve always kinda imagined going to the courthouse (or a drivethru chapel in Vegas) and then having a big party/reception some time after we’d gotten back from our honeymoon with lots of food and drink. It would be more fun for me with less ceremony and I’d still get to have everyone get together, but it would be a lot cheaper and less stressful.
While I’m not big on weddings, I don’t think that people that choose to have a big fancy ones are stupid. It might be stupid if you go into major debt paying for your wedding, or you spend crazy amounts on personalized invitations and seat covers and things guests don’t notice or care about, but if you can afford it and want to have a nice wedding with your family and friends there, I don’t think that’s crazy or stupid. Sure, they could spend that money on a house or something practical, but there’s a lot of money I spend on fun or silly stuff that I could be spending on practical things.
But if they cared about having family and friends there, and having a big fun wedding like others they’ve been to, then their memories wouldn’t be the same if they just went to the courthouse. Not all memories are equal. I do think that more people should just elope, since I do hear a lot of people who feel a lot of pressure about their wedding and just end up stressing out a huge amount and not enjoying it, but that doesn’t mean that everyone needs to skip out on having a wedding.
I would seriously think my priorities were being tested. Like, if I chose the wedding, I’m pretty sure my father would say, “Girl, have you lost your fucking mind! I’m not giving you a damn cent until you grow up!”
But I do admit that it wouldn’t be so clear cut (for me) if someone simply offered me $10,000 or an interest-free loan on a $50K downpayment, especially if I was in a point in my life when bills are piling up and I have little interest in buying a home.
I couldn’t spend 10,000 on a wedding, but I could spend that on the wedding and honeymoon combined. I’m still a little sad that my wife and I never had a proper honeymoon, so that offer might be tempting.
Still, I would go with the interest-free mortgage. It’s that kind of practical thinking that made me skip the honeymoon the first time.
Maybe, but if you offset that against the difference in mortgage payment with the larger down payment (and/or increasing rent over 10 years), it makes a big difference.
Plus, the offer wasn’t “10K in cash to you now that you don’t have to pay back”, it was “10K that is spent in one day and is G.O.N.E. Gone”.
We had a low-key wedding that sat 20 people and almost certainly cost less than 1500 dollars (my parents paid so I’m not sure of the exact amount). Not that we were offered a down payment on anything, but my brothers and my husband’s siblings all had huge weddings that probably cost 20K+ and we’re juts as married as they are (more so than one brother, who divorced after 20ish years).
A lot depends on where you are. Either choice requires you doing something: either having a wedding party, or buying a house. There is no guarantee either choice is a good idea, subjectively or financially, at that particular moment.
For example, The premise behind accepting the $50K loan is that you are in a position to buy a house more or less right away (and that this is a good financial idea) as newlyweds, rather than renting (for a time, or forever for that matter). However, that may not be true.
If you had planned in any event to have a wedding party costing up to $10 K, taking the $10K now is the better option. Particularly if you live in a place, or under circumstances, where buying real estate right away isn’t a good idea.
That would have been the case for me - so I’ll buck the obvious trend in this thread and say I’d have taken the $10K, and continued to rent, rather than house-hunting.
You really can’t answer this question properly without knowing a bit more about mortgage interest rates (and how a larger downpayment influences it), the amount you still will borrow and inflation rate even.
One thing is sure though, repaying ahead of time makes little sense economically. Unless you expect a negative interest rate for the next 5 years to be the best you can do.
I don’t think the economic value comparison between the two options is the important concern. I assume they would be about equal, but in the end it doesn’t make much difference if one is slightly richer than the other.
To my mind, this question is about what you want - wedding party, or house purchase.
A lot of folks are assuming that wanting a house purchase is the prudent and rational course - which may be true or it may not.
This “offer” was given to my wife and I years ago, but came up in a conversation recently with a girl I know. She was quite critical of “my” decision to not have a big wedding for my wife. I tried to explain to her that we both thought it was best to take the loan, but she insisted that my wife probably went along with the loan option just to keep me happy and that my wife probably really wanted a big wedding. She felt that we could have saved up money on our own for a home.
Just to clarify, at no time did my FIL say something like "if you guys have a wedding ceremony of any sort, the loan offer is “off the table”. My parents didn’t have money to spend on a big wedding and neither did my wife and I. The Court House ceremony was fine with us.
We did go on a nice extended honeymoon travelling the length and breadth of India over a 3 month time period. (And spending less than $2000.)
(Oh, and we are still together after 33 years. The girl I was having a conversation with is* twice* divorced.)
It is an interesting example of cultural values at work. The majority here see immediate house purchase as a “virtuous, frugal and high-minded” decision.
However, depending on your situation, it may well be an incorrect decision, from a personal financial POV. In many cases, immediately buying real estate may be a very poor decision for newly married people to make.
Home ownership clearly carries with it a large freight of cultural expectations, particularly here in NA.
Remember that Dopers typically have a disdain for big weddings (with “big” defined as anything more expensive than of a courthouse ceremony followed by backyard BBQ with paper plates). I think if the offer was $10K versus a $50K home loan, there would be more diversity in opinions.
I agree, but I don’t think the deal stated when the house had to be bought. If the couple can buy their house whenever they want (like when they’ve finally settled at a location they are both happy and secure with), then that’s a different situation than a requirement to buy the house right now, at a particular location.
But I can see how the offer alone could pressure a couple into buying before they are ready.
Here’s another argument for choosing the wedding: spending less on your wedding may save your marraige Perhaps if a couple doesn’t have to worry about wedding costs, they can dodge the stresses that plague newlyweds and focus more on their relationship. Although, I can see how having a $10K windfall may make a couple upgrade their wedding plans from simple and affordable to overly elaborate and budget-breaking. In such a case, they may have been smarter choosing the home loan.