HOME > Chowhound > San Francisco Bay Area >

Discussion

Wedding Caterer Under $80-100/pp

My fiancee and I are foodies who love dive restaurants, cheap eats, as well as the occasional high end place. I used to work in restaurants and we both cook alot. We are getting married and are planning a wedding for about 100-120 people. We have talked to a bunch of caterers, and they seem to come in 3 types = high end caterers who charge $125-150pp on up, and you get excellent food but pay through the nose for it; lower end caterers who provide standard, uninteresting wedding fare; and independent caterers who are less established, less organized but might be able to do a good job. the more organized/established caterers on the low and high ends seem to throw in alot of extra expense on a variety of areas - you are still paying $40+/pp for food costs (flank steak with mashed potatoes plus a few apps?) and on the service end as well. We are doing invitations, wine, gifts, etc our selves, but are a little at a loss as to how to find someone who meets our budget for catering.

Does anyone have someone they can recommend who serves interesting, quality food and can do something simple and not outrageously expensive? We are hoping for $80pp +20pp alchohol which we will provide.

Thanks!

  1. Click to Upload a photo (10 MB limit)
Delete
  1. Which caterers have you already ruled out? That might help focus the replies to your question.

    1 Reply
    1. re: Melanie Wong

      Small Potatoes, Left Coast Catering, Melons, Jane Hammond, James Stansfield. A few others, but those are off the top of my head.

    2. Could you do a morning wedding followed by brunch? Everyone loves brunch food, and it's way cheaper than dinner.

      1 Reply
      1. re: pikawicca

        That's a good idea, but we're doing a relatively late rehearsal dinner the night before, and have sent out invites with a 4 p.m. start time, so we're a little locked in.

      2. The original comment has been removed
        1. The original comment has been removed
          1. The original comment has been removed