CLINTON WEDDING vs. BUSH WEDDING (and the real estate)

In this morning’s Wall Street Journal, it was reported that Jenna Bush’s wedding cost a mere $ 100,000.00 compared to the stratospheric $ 3 million estimate for Chelsea Clinton’s wedding: “Bottom line? Think more like Jenna Bush, and less like Chelsea Clinton”

A good point, yet one major defining issue was over-looked: the real estate. The Clinton’s do not own a huge ranch to host a wedding like this, and if they were buying the Astor Mansion in Rhinebeck, it would set them back about $ 12 million. The Bush’s 1,600 acre ranch is worth many millions and is (surprisingly) extremely energy efficient and ‘green': Rush would not approve! So had the Clinton’s owned a spectacular property to host this wedding, would the $ 3 million cost have been significantly less? “Great real estate can be like a great accessory,” says Leonard Steinberg, head of the Luxuryloft team and managing director of Prudential Douglas Elliman.”It can distract from a cheap outfit. An inexpensive wedding on spectacular real estate always looks more expensive.”

Article Global Facebook Twitter Myspace Friendfeed Technorati Digg Google StumbleUpon Eli Pets

Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

One Response to “CLINTON WEDDING vs. BUSH WEDDING (and the real estate)”

  1. lola gardner says:

    I have heard estimates from 2-9M. It seemed a gorgeous affair but would be so much more intimate on their own property plus cost saving.

Leave a Reply