"My meeting has been extended to, after 3 o'clock." Is this a proper way of saying?

Question

So if I need to tell that my current meeting has been extended, and won't be able to make it to a meeting scheduled at 3 o'clock. Which one is proper way of saying in a corporate setting? I am not sure which sentence construction is right.

1. "My meeting has been extended to, after 3 o'clock. I won't be able to make it to 3 o'clock meeting."

2. "My meeting has been extended after 3 o'clock. I won't be able to make it to 3 o'clock meeting."

3. "My meeting has been extended until, after 3 o'clock. I wont be able to make it to 3 o'clock meeting."

Answer 1

"extendend to after 3pm" (no comma) is quite understandable; "until after 3pm" is also clear. You don't separate the prepositions with a comma, nor would you pause in speech.

You can split it up:

The meeting has been extended and we won't be finished at 3pm...

But while that avoids the double preposition, it is a bit more wordy.

Or you can just leave it implied:

My earlier meeting has been extended, so I won't be able to make the 3pm meeting.

It's clear from the context that the meetings clash.

Answer 2

I would say “My first meeting has been extended past 3pm, so I won’t be able to join the 3pm meeting in time”. You could use “beyond” instead of “past”.

Why? It makes clear that there are two meetings, that could be confusing. In a corporate setting I’d slightly prefer to say 3am or 3pm instead of 3o’clock.

The comma after “extended to” or “extended until” is wrong. “Extended after 3pm” can be misunderstood as “I was told after 3pm that the meeting would be extended”.