© Formula One Management; at www.formula1.com

Bernie Ecclestone will be 80 years old.  F1 is a business that generates an annual turnover of nearly $750 million.  When (not if) Ecclestone can no longer manage the affairs of F1, who will replace him? And who is standing up to protect the interests of the sport?

Various candidates have been suggested, but legitimate pretenders to the throne have not been floated.  It beggars belief that the corporate stewards of F1, including the FIA itself, do not take more time to consider candidates to succeed Ecclestone.  The FIA, as the sporting authority, must be assured that the sport is in the hands of someone capable of maintaining F1’s credibility as the pinnacle of motorsport.  Any corporation on Wall Street would be required by its board to consider such issues.  Is F1 somehow immune from the need for leadership?

The commercial rights to F1 are controlled, in effect, by Formula One Group, a collection of companies in which the majority members are CVC Capital Partners and JP Morgan, the investment bank.  The remaining interests are owned by trusts controlled by Bernie Ecclestone.  Formula One Group is responsible for negotiating with circuit owners and broadcasters, and selling trackside advertising.

The modern business of F1 was formed in the late 1970s and early 1980s, when Bernie Ecclestone shrewdly organized the teams to wrest more control over the revenue generated by the sport.  The Formula One Constructors Association (FOCA) defeated the FIA in a battle for control of F1’s commercial revenue stream.  Ecclestone made the switch from team owner to organizer, negotiating for the teams.  In the process, he grew fabulously wealthy.

Years ago, Bernie Ecclestone placed his F1 interests into a trust, and then sold portions of his holdings to various investors.  Over time, shares in Ecclestone’s holdings were exchanged between investors and bankers who knew nothing of F1 and did not have its interests at heart.  This frightened both teams and manufacturers, who took steps to set up a series of their own.  After extensive legal wrangling, Ecclestone retained control of F1’s core businesses, but CVC Capital Partners and JP Morgan now control Formula One Group.

So it is down to this: an 80-year-old man, an investment bank, and another investment bank.  Only one racer in the bunch, and he’s on short time.

Today, Formula One Administration (owner of F1’s commercial rights) is a company with an annual turnover of $750 million.  This income stream is entirely dependent on the teams that line up on Sunday afternoon to take the green lights.  It distresses us to realize that beyond Bernie Ecclestone, no one–save the teams–has the interests of the race fan at heart.  We trust not in anonymous bankers, but in Ron Dennis, Frank Williams, Luca di Montezemolo, Ross Brawn, and others like them.  Men who look beyond dollar signs and instead see checkered flags.  This is where Jean Todt and the FIA must assume the mantle as guardian of the sport’s integrity.  The history of the sport cannot simply be turned over to the bankers.

» Goldman staff have the last laugh on bonuses

They’ve called it the $30bn speech – that’s the value wiped off shares in top US companies in the minutes after President Obama announced on Thursday that he was to introduce measures to reduce the size of financial institutions and limit their ability to take on risk.

Almost without exception, big bank shares headed south on the news, with stock in Goldman falling some 8% Thursday and Friday. But Goldman staff are doubtless delighted at the effect Obama’s statement had on the firm’s shares, as the award price used for calculating the number of shares that go into individual bonus packages (as deferred equity) is thought to have been based on Friday’s close. In other words, thanks to the President’s obsession with bankers and their bonuses, Goldman staff will actually receive around 8% more stock in their bonus sacks than they would have before he opened his mouth. Such is The Law of Unintended Consequences.

It seems too neat to be true – which probably means that it isn’t. It’s a sign of our obsession with Goldman that a speech which implies the end of its business model, has its stock fall significantly and put its very future in doubt is seen as being in its favour.

I am, apparently, overpaid. My employer does not think so, I am less certain, the public is really rabidly, absolutely, 100% doubt-free need-no-truth-drug call-me-a-liar-if-an-atom-of-doubt-crosses-my-mind certain. This is odd, because they do not know me and most people find my job difficult to describe. However, their basic assumption that I am not saving the world is safe, so this is hardly a Batman-esque public anger at the anti-hero ironic situation; other assumptions that I am as evil as a James Bond super-villain probably need further scrutiny in the court of public opinion.

It has been a tough week to be a banker. Well, no. It’s been a tough week to be a solider, or a Haitian, but bankers? I appreciate the public isn’t exactly in love with the banks (which is a shame because they used to be soooooo close) but it has been tough in the same way that the coffee shop running out of your favourite syrup has been tough. The investment banks are outraged but are not saying so for fear of being lynched (an unusually self-aware move): the world, strangely, did not tremble.

The rest of the script is supposed to work this way: I express remorse at mistakes made, look awkward on the subject of bonuses but insist they are necessary, try not to be too obnoxious and hope it all goes away.

Except I am not sorry. I did not take the government’s dollar. I am happy with the salary I am paid (although to be fair, I still have the mental age of a teenager so find being paid at all is a somewhat perplexing experience) and my employer is happy to pay it (as are others would-be employers). I did not create a housing bubble, encourage mortgage dealers to lend money they would never, ever get back. I did not gave credit ratings to unsound securities. I did not take out a mortgage I would never repay. I did not speculate on house prices (either by buying personally, or trading). I did not create regulators who are too proud to admit they do not understand the markets. I did not change how I viewed risk dependent upon my salary (or my bonus). I did not put my money in Icesave accounts. I spend some of my salary and when I do I try to benefit others. I pay tax. I try to do the right thing. I am not sorry.

» Goldman Sachs teams could quit the city over taxes and regulations

Would anyone miss them?

Alongside its results last year Goldman highlighted that it paid £1.1bn in UK corporation tax, the biggest contribution from the UK financial sector. Its 5,000 London employees had also contributed hundreds of millions of pounds in income tax.

Well, yes, apart from that. The news is less serious than it seems: the organisation appears to be thinking aloud, and rather than making idle threats is wondering if it is viable to move (Switzerland is the most likely candidate) and if so, whether or not to do so. Hmmm, that’s actually a lot less comforting than an idle threat. Still, even Goldman appear unconvinced about the idea of moving, which means London may be safe – or, if that is your view, burdened – for a while yet.

» With bigger bonuses, another upside for banks

It’s a strange news story …

For all banks and Wall Street firms, “I’m sure we’re talking $200 billion total compensation, which would create a tax savings for the firms of $80 billion,” said Robert Willens, an accounting and tax analyst in New York who runs a consulting firm, Robert Willens LLC. The figure does not include bonus plans by hedge funds, which are likely to reduce their payouts after a down year.

The tax deductions, which will increase the bottom line of the banks, are perfectly legal and not new. They come as compensation for 2009 has roared back after the largest banks paid back billions of dollars in federal aid, an outlay still fresh in the minds of taxpayers. As pay goes up, so do the deductions.

Its category as news is questionable – there is nothing new here – but it is an interesting example of outrage. The more companies pay people, the more tax-deductable costs that they have. This, though, is presented as an extremely sly tax fiddle. (One would think that paying out more costs is generally seen as a negative when it comes to the profit-hungry vampiric organisation that is an investment bank, but perhaps not.)

The most likely culprits are a slow news day or a self-publicist, or possibly both in a thrilling combination. Still, we all have to make our money somehow.

I didn’t even want to be a banker. Not that there’s a pin-striped press gang wandering the streets of London, forcing people into a life of international finance against their will, coshing people with a stock portfolio before leaving them, possibly brain-damaged, in a marble foyer with a blackberry and a Charles Tyrwhitt loyalty card.  It’s just I sort of drifted into it.

They were handing out free beer. I didn’t even know who they were – they weren’t in disguise, it’s just my interest in banking was limited to my student overdraft – and as a student a free anything, especially beer, was of interest. I gave them my CV, and, not thinking I was their type I thought it was a pretty reasonable deal. When I returned from two interviews in London, the second of which made me absolutely certain I was not their type, I forgot about the first interview and did a rather good impression of a sour grape, swearing I was never going to work there even if they paid me, which does seem to imply I had misunderstood the basic premise of a summer internship.

At the time my views were social democratic / liberal. I could just short-cut that awkward phrase and describe myself as a lefty, but like so many labels it keeps bad company: Arthur Scargill, Harriet Harman … Stalin. It’s like describing yourself as a euro-sceptic, which, let’s face it, however sceptical you are about the European Union, is also shorthand for “I’m a right-wing xenophobic nut-job who dislikes foreigners”.

I did the internship for the money. I was a student and I needed it. Then I went back the following summer. Then they offered me a full time job.

So perhaps it was the money after all, but I prefer to think it’s more complicated than that. I used to have a manager who said “money only demotivates people, I’ve never met a person whose performance was improved by the prospect of more money“, and I suspect he is right. When it comes to remuneration people either seem to feel that they have got the right level or not enough, and that other people have too much. I have yet to meet anyone who feels they are overpaid. Money is like freedom: it’s always good to have more and it’s awfully easy to take it for granted when you have it.

I stayed for the work. I get bored easily and every day people would bring me new, intriguing, fiendish puzzles to solve – which brings forth a strange mental image of someone dumping a stack of “Puzzler Monthly” on my desk every day.

“More puzzlers, boss?”
[Through a cigar poking from one corner of his mouth] “‘Fraid so, Ninja.”
“This just ain’t right, boss.”
“This is a bank, Ninja, not a holiday camp. I should have hauled you have the coals for that wordsearch you did yesterday, dammit man.”
“Sorry boss.”
“We’re all sorry, Ninja, but it don’t get the puzzles done.”

What I’m really trying to say is that I’m not greedy, that there’s reasons other than the money. Greed may be good, but it is a surprisingly shy character trait.

While the credit cards are convenient and give you instantaneous satisfaction, the debt by the credit card is an enormous problem in the modern societies. If not used wisely they lead to the money of going beyond of the budget which you still do not have. The expenditure right because you can is not a wise movement. The assembly of the debt by the credit card, particularly if you have more than one chart, can be a disaster if you cannot sponge with the balance of them all each month.

Now is the hour to take the ordering of your financial in the long term contract. If you must employ the credit to buy all do you want to be, need you really him? Or is this one to want? Look at consolidating your debt by the credit card in a low payment of the interests and throw the remainder of your credit cards. Keep only one with a bottom balances minimum. Keep the limit close to an amount which you can sponge in step more than two months. Once you have only one payment, you can allow yourselves to increase your monthly payment to pay your debt by the credit card in addition to moreover more quickly.

There is nothing worse than the pressure of several maxed outside the credit cards and the debt by the credit card while resulting. Obtain your expenditure under the order. The financial embarrassments that she is added to your life are not right in value them. Employ your by the credit card for urgencies. Stop the expenditure beyond your means or you can be to try to avoid the bankruptcy afterwards. Begin a financial plan – start an assessment on your incomings and outgoings, and disc very which you spend for one month. Absolutely all – flat to carry, invoices, walks – each hundred simple that you spend. And, don’t fraud. The only person that you cheat is yourself. At the end of the month, throw a glance so that you spent. What does resemble it? How much cost on the essential articles?

Food, utilities, payments of loan Where you spent the rest – how much could you look at now have lived outwards? Throw a long hard glance and are honest about it. I will bet that there is to much don’t you the need which could be put towards your debt by the credit card.

Envisage your future and live in your means. And stick with your budget to avoid a debt more by the credit card. The payment of your weekly magazine of credit cards will help to refund your debt by the credit card quickly and not more you will fear your invoice by the monthly credit card. It will give you freedom to be saved in the future and will achieve greater dreams and goals. It will also give you an excellent reputation of solvency to help you to make your financial dreams come true. Nobody will do it for you. As do you wait. To move directly in the bankruptcy because you don’t will be able what to make? Leave there and treat your debt by the credit card.

Always pay it by the credit card with the initially highest interest rate. It is right good sense. Do you know even what are the rates on your debt by the credit card? Perhaps you should check it then will draw your head out of sand and will recover your finances in the order. Brasses you of all these credit cards, take the ordering of your life and have a marvelous future.

Weekend Box Office:

1. High School Musical 3 – $42M
2. Saw V – $30.5M
3. Max Payne – $7.6M

It’s safe to say that HSM3 and Saw 847 creamed the competition. Pride and Glory came in fifth, with $6.3 million, right behind (*sigh*) Beverly Hills Chihuahua. Can’t win ‘em all.

Weekend Box Office:

1. Max Payne: $18M
2. Beverly Hills Chihuahuas: $11.2M
3. The Secret Life of Bees: $11.1M

W. came in fourth. President Bush has a 22% approval rating. That ties to lowest rating of any president since they started keeping score. Why then, pray, did Oliver Stone think he would find an audience for this movie? WE DO NOT LIKE THIS MAN. We do not want to watch a movie about him.

Priceless Possession

            Right now, we are experiencing different problems and most of us think that the only solution for this is money – the most important thing in this world. Today money makes us temporarily happy, but the truth is that we will be much happier if the gift of God given to us be used in many good ways, and use it according to his will. In this simple way, we will be able to feel the true meaning of contentment and happiness that money can’t provide us. Honestly speaking money makes me happy because I  was able to buy everything I want, but not the things I really  need like love, respect, faith, hope can’t afford to buy the what we called “EVERLASTING  LIFE” – the most important thing I need that only God almighty can give.

Weekend Box Office:

1. Eagle Eye – $29.2M
2. Nights in Rodanthe – $13.6M
3. Lakeview Terrace – $7M

Y’all, I am so out of it after last week. Was Eagle Eye any good? The trailer just went in one side of my brain and out the other. I vaguely remember Julianne Moore, talking into a phone sternly. Nights in Rodanthe can wait until my mom comes to visit in a couple of weeks (in spite of the dismal reviews). Kirk Cameron’s little born-again meditation, Fireproof, made over $6 million, almost edging out Sam Jackson there. That’s $6M that probably should have gone to tithing and feeding the hungry, but, whatevs; at least they didn’t send it to John McCain.

Weekend box office:

1. Lakeview Terrace – $15.6M
2. Burn After Reading – $11.3M
3. My Best Friend’s Girl – $8.3M

Weekend box office:

1. Burn After Reading – $19.4M
2. The Family That Preys – $18M
3. Righteous Kill – $16.5M

Weekend box office:

1. Bangkok Dangerous: $7.8M
2. Tropic Thunder: $7.5M
3. The House Bunny: $5.9M

These numbers represent a 20% drop in box office from the same time last year. Can you say “slim pickins?”

Weekend box office:

1. Tropic Thunder – $14.3M
2. Babylon A.D. – $12M
3. The Dark Knight – $11M

Weekend box office:

1. Tropic Thunder – $16.1M
2. The House Bunny – $15.1M
3. Death Race – $12.3M

» JP Morgan may drop HQ plans

JP Morgan have, it is alleged, threatened not to build their very nice new building because of the bonus tax. Several possibilities:

The facts are intriguingly vague. JP Morgan have not actually threatened not to build their shiny new building, but the possibility has been raised by “a senior J.P. Morgan executive“. The building is supposed to cost £1.5 billion versus a bonus tax which is supposed to raise almost a third of that.

However, there is no detail to say that the alleged executive knows anything about it, was sober at the time of speaking or even exists. On the other hand, perhaps its Jamie Dimon, the head of JPM himself, applying more pressure on the government. Also, it’s really just a new building – valuable for builders, but not really a threat to withdraw jobs, and it’s the jobs issue (or rather, London’s precious status as a financial centre) which the government has heard most about. The following quote (from another JPM executive) is also worthy of note:

There were no threats made on the call and we have made no decisions on people or buildings based on the super-tax announcement.

All we really know is that the head of JPM had a chat with the chancellor and said he was not entirely happy about the bonus tax, which is not really surprising. If he had praised it, that would have been a more solid news story.

Autosport this week reports that Luca di Montezemolo, chairman of Fiat and Ferrari, has issued a warning that all is not right in the F1 universe.  (Link:  http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/80687) Just as Enzo Ferrari often threatened to quit F1, Montezemolo demands improvements in the sport or Ferrari will “have motivation somewhere else” (i.e., Le Mans).  This is classic Ferrari politicking in the mold of Enzo Ferrari, who threatened to quit the sport when its interests diverged from his own.

When it comes to Montezemolo, we listen.  Why? Because he has been in the F1 business just about as long as anyone currently at the helm (Ron Dennis, Frank Williams, and Bernie Ecclestone are the other long-lifers), and we trust his judgment.  He has assumed a leadership mantle in FOTA, and deserves respect for challenging the status quo.  He is not extreme in his views, nor unrealistic in his demands.

His point is simple but obvious:  despite all the claims of “peace in our time”, what we have now in F1 is a cessation of hostilities, not peace.  Because Ferrari is F1, Montezemolo’s words must be regarded as serious statements of intent rather than pure posturing.

There is a general consensus among F1 stakeholders, including Montezemolo, that the sport suffers from three problems: (1) a lack of overtaking (insufficent on-track excitement); (2) the widening gulf between the average fan and the teams, drivers, and F1 itself; and (3) the impact of cost-cutting at the expense of the spectacle.

Without offering any solutions for the lack of overtaking, Montezemolo acknowledges that F1 needs to emphasize performance and technology for Ferrari to remain interested.   We feel the same way.  F1 is the pinacle of motorsport; it is not a spec series that limits advances in technology to artificially foster competition.  Just the opposite.  Ferrarri manufactures high performance sports cars; F1 is not worth much to Ferrari (or anyone) if it cannot be used to display the best of what Maranello offers.

Montezemolo also questions the restrictive testing ban.  Rookies and substitute drivers struggled all season due to a lack of test mileage, and there is no end in sight.  The excuse given for the change was cost-cutting, but the knock-on effect is to reduce seat time for anyone who is not already in a plum drive.  Again, cost-cutting at the expense of the spectacle (driving quality).  Although there is no tire war (and thus less need for testing mileage), testing race cars is key to improvement and, thus, required to spur competition.  A testing ban runs contradictory to this concept.

But it is the interaction between the sport and the public which draws Montezemolo’s ire, and ours.  An F1 ticket is expensive, discouraging all but the wealthiest spectators to attend.  The paddock club is an absurd concept.  In the “new” F1 countries (i.e., the Middle East and Asia), ticket prices are too high for locals, which virtually guarantees that the sport will not take hold in these places.  “Today a young boy with his girlfriend can fly around the world for less than attending the Monza GP in the best seats. Is that right?” Montezemolo asks.

We agree, and as we have pointed out in this blog on prior occasions, F1 needs to study the rise of NASCAR in North America.  There is no excuse for asking the casual race fan to spend a week’s salary to watch a two-hour race, with brief qualifying on Saturday and limited running on Friday.  Few are motivated to travel in a recession to watch just six hours of track time.  In addition, for the pleasure, there is no meaningful interaction with the drivers, and no opportunity to walk the paddock unless you can afford it.  Rest assured your seat will be quite far from the actual circuit.

Attendance was decidedly down in Turkey this year, as well as Shanghai.  We attended the first race in Shanghai and concluded there is not enough local disposable income to consistently support an F1 race on a local level.  Tourists, yes.  Chinese who make USD1000 per year? No, they will not be buying any USD200 race tickets for 120 minutes of fun.

Currently, it can be more enjoyable to watch a race on television than to attend.  Montezemolo knows this must change.   What makes F1 great is the spectacle of tifosi lining the track, Brazilians going mad at Interlagos, and Finns dressed in all manner of blue and white to follow their own (you learn what “Suomi” means pretty quickly).  The passion of grand prix spectators is part of what is great and good about the sport.    Credit Montezemolo for reminding people of this simple but overlooked fact.

Bernie Ecclestone once proposed having a race at his private Paul Ricard test track in France, to be attended by invited guests and shown only on television without an audience.  How sad, we thought.  Racing for no one but a narrow elite.

In other words, we need people in F1. Not just machines.

Word is that Robert Kubica has asked his management to conduct further investigation into the financial backing of Gerald Lopez, whose Genii group this week acquired a controlling interest in Renault’s F1 program.

Renault’s au revoir completes the disappearance of four manufacturers from F1 in 12 month’s time.  Honda, Toyota, BMW and now Renault have left the building, as they say.  Renault was not content simply to walk away, so instead a partnership has been arranged whereby the team will be branded as “Renault” but will not be a factory team.  The chassis will be built in Enstone, but the engines will come from Renault in France.  Renault will also supply engines to Red Bull.  Speculation was that Renault is contractually bound to F1 in one form or another based on the newly revised governing document, the Concorde Agreement.

For the sake of the sport, Renault’s withdrawal preserves the team, and we are all in favor of that.  Renault has supported F1 for many years, and while it has run hot and cold with the sport over time, the team has provided many great memories and two world titles for Fernando Alonso.

But Robert Kubica is no dummy.  Anyone who thinks Kubica lacks toughness should have another look at his 75g crash in Canada in 2007, and recall that he asked to drive the car with a fractured rib the following race at Indy.  Asking for a little more financial reassurance from a new owner is prudent business strategy, and all Kubica needs to do is look at the long list of drivers stiffed by their teams for guidance.  If you are going to strap yourself into an F1 car and risk death or disability, you might want to ensure first that the bank account is full.

And if all moves in your F1 career must count for something, and you are a talented Polish driver who is the only driver Lewis Hamilton fears, you might want to be certain that the team is here to stay.  Racing costs money.  As we have seen with Midland F1, and later Spyker, coming into the sport with good intentions is one thing.  Running an F1 team for an entire season, and staying in the black while doing it, quite another.

In recent memory, Heinz Harald Frentzen was left cap in hand after Arrows folded during the 2002 season.  Prost left a mountain of debt when he left F1, and allegedly had a dispute with Jean Alesi over sums  owed the French driver.  Giancarlo Fisichella was required to take Eddie Jordan to court after EJ came up a few quid short for the Roman’s paycheck in 2003.  And this is just the modern era…..

So, if we were Kubica, we’d be thinking a little Jerry Maguire is in order. You know,  “Show me the money.”

I recently decided that I need to reel my budget in a little.  For the past few months of planning, it’s been like a wild little pony that doesn’t listen to directions.  I needed the Budget Whisperer, and it came in the form of my fiance.  :)

I had kinda just been saying, “Oh well,” when it came to things that we were planning on for our wedding.  Then I received my flower/decor proposal from my wedding planner, and I was a little stunned.  Now don’t get me wrong, I love my planner.  Cynthia is fantastic.  She is very patient, creative, organized, and has given me some fantastic deals.  

The problem was that at our last meeting, she had mentioned that her company has a gazebo that they are building to look exactly like the pavilion at the end of the Twilight movie:  

It is perfect!  It is exactly what I had hoped for!  I thought I was getting it for free.

Insert tire screetches.

It’s not free.  And now, upon reflection, I feel incredibly naive to think that I would have just been given this pavilion.  On the flower budget, it is listed to rent for $1150 which includes delivery, set up, and tear down.  This just isn’t in the budget, and A about had a cow when he found out how much it would cost.  He basically put his foot down, and he doesn’t do that very often.  

I tried to look at the rest of the flower/decor budget to see if there were things that I could cut that would justify the gazebo, but I would basically have to get ride of most if not all of our other decor.  

There is some glimmer of hope.  A and his father (and I) are pretty crafty/handy and have a pretty good build it on your own ability.  This weekend, we are going to Lowes to scout out parts and price this thing out.  I have a sneaking suspicion that I could build it for $500 or less and then sell it or use it when we are done.  It would be lovely to have the gazebo in our back yard after the wedding…  

I was kind of disappointed, but the fact that we are saving big time money and having a challenge of building it ourselves is kind of invigorating.  I will do follow up posts on this major DIY project as it unfolds.  

Here is another DIY project that I found on This Young House that I am considering at this point.  I’m not sure if we’ll need them or not, but if we do, we know how to do it for super cheap!  

These pretty globes are none other than the $1-3 replacement globes that you can find at your local hardware store.  

Here they are lit up at nighttime:  

I think they cast a lovely glow around them!  You could put a tea light, battery operated tea light, or (something I’m dying to try) a throwie!  Have you heard of these magical things?  

They cost about 10-20 cents each in materials to make, and they last for ten times longer than batterie operated tea-lights.  Check out how to make these here on the Instructables website.  

We are also looking at other options to save money.  We have cut our guest list from 160 to 120 and are hoping for an even 100 for dinner.  I wouldn’t mind inviting more people to stop by for dancing and cocktails later in the evening.  This has saved major money as dinner is about $40 a head.  

I am really trying to figure out now what we want and how we can accomplish these things in the most cost effective way.  What was/is/will be your best way to save money in your budget?  Have you had any amazing experiences or ideas for DIY projects?  Please share!

Okay, so I don’t really write checks anymore.  I make almost all my payments online.  In fact, I don’t even have physical checks anymore.  I ran out about 4 months ago and figured that I didn’t want to order a new set until I have my new name after getting married.  Then…THEN my friends, I will have checks again. 

Anyhoo, this post is about getting things checked (off my to-do list) and getting things checked (paid for).  

This is what I got done this morning:

I signed the contract for our band, The Funktastic 5, and mailed it out.  We are very excited about this band.  Everyone loves them, they’ve got variety and energy, and I think it’s really going to help everyone get up and dancing at our wedding.  CHECK.  

I sent in the room block reservation form for our out-of-town guests.  CHECK.  

I signed the contract for our photobooth (Joe’s Photobooth).  Yay!!!!  I still need to write a physical check for this, so I’m going to wait until I get paid on the 1st to send this in.  That way I can up what I pay my FI, and he can write the check.  (ps:  I just ran that by my FI who is sitting 10 feet away from me who laughed when I asked him to write a check.  He thinks it’s HILARIOUS that I’m in check hiatus.)  CHECK.  

I also am being a good girl and making copies of everything and keeping all contracts and what not safe in my wedding expandable folder.  CHECK.  

I scheduled my first dress fitting appointment for June 12th.  At this appointment, I’ll be trying on the muslin mock up.  This will be a VERY interesting appointment as it will be the first time that I’ve actually seen Brandie Thomas’s handywork.  I’ll take lots of pictures and post about that after the fitting.  CHECK.  

The last check (to-do) that I got done today was that I sent our invitation designer, Lindsey Ryan, all of our wedding info.  This was something that I had put off for some reason.  Gathering information was just something that I did not have time to do this last month until my grad classes were done for the semester.  I finally got all my ducks in a row, and she’s got all the information she needs to start designing our stationery suite.  I also asked her if she’d like to meet in person when I drive to Chicago on the 12th for my dress fitting.  CHECK!  

I’m le tired.

Okay, before we go much further in my wedding ramblings, I feel the need to confess to you all my nitty gritty budget details.  Brace yourselves, I’m gonna lay it on you…

Current credit card debt:  $5384.80…Before you poop your pants, you should know that last year it was up to $12,000 plus, and I’ve been working aggressively to pay it off at the rate of about $1000 per month.  My goal is to have it all paid off by October 1st of this year.  At that point my only debt will be my student loans (which are on hold because I am in grad school right now…FREE GRAD SCHOOL I might add before you poop your pants again). 

Savings:  Nada…I’ve never really had stable savings.  After my credit card is paid off, I plan on putting that $1000 that was going to my credit card each month in a savings account slash slush fund for the wedding. 

Wedding budget:  Hovering around $18,000

Parent contribution:  $7000

Our contribution:  $11,000

My goal is to have the wedding that we want and get out with little to no debt on a credit card due to the wedding expenses….Do you think we’ll make it?  

Let’s break down the budget.  The following is where I currently stand for different expense categories:

Ceremony:  $900 for site rental and chairs at the golf course.  I don’t really like the $500 site rental, but they aren’t charging us a site rental for the reception, so meh.

Food and Drink:  $9000 for delicious appetizers, plated dinner, and open bar.  Yes, this fee is half our budget, but we feel that food is important.  We may go to a partial open bar to save some money on this in the future, but for now, it stands.

Decorations:  $1800 for all flowers, centerpieces, lighting, linens, etc. 

Music:  $2250 for a Celtic band to play during the ceremony and cocktail hour and a traditional 5 piece band to play during dancing, plus tips for all musicians.

Attire:  $500 for my gown (being hand made at a STEAL), jewelry, veil, and other accessories.  Lingerie and spa treatments I am hoping to get gift cards for this Christmas.

Gifts for attendants and parents:  $500 (This is an arbitrary number as we don’t know what we are going to be doing for our wedding party yet…)

Photography:  $2900 for 8 hours of photography and albums and digital copyright.  Our photographer is FANTASTIC!

Photobooth:  $800 for 3 hours of photobooth time during the dancing hour.  This is our favor to our guests.

For those of you savy calculator readers, you can probably total that up and realize that it’s a little over $18k, but we are getting an unspecified sum from my FI’s parents, so that will bring our total contribution down some. 

So that’s where we stand.  I have been pretty vigilant for this budget from day one, and my FI is kind of in the dark about what we are spending.  This works for us because as far as our contribution, I am paying for the majority of it.  I think this is fair being that he spent $4200 for my engagement ring and will also be paying for the honeymoon.  In the end, I may ask him for a couple grand, but for the most part, I am happy with where our budget is headed. 

So whatdya think?  Are you in debt?  Are you going to be in bigger debt when your wedding is said and done?