vastgoedposities

17:15 Feb 28, 2016 

Sure, I agree. Just wanted to explain why the term 'posities' is used in the Dutch source.

17:11 Feb 28, 2016 

Yeah, I get that, but whereas it seems acceptable in Dutch to use the term "posities" more broadly, in English that seems very weird to me. (It's not the "items" that one exploits but the property assets themselves, if that makes sense)

16:57 Feb 28, 2016 

The use of the term 'posities' should be seen in the context of the company's balance sheet. The company's property assets (should) appear as items in the balance sheet (NL vastgoedposities op de balans).

16:55 Feb 28, 2016 

However, later on they also talk about "het afbouwen van vastgoedposities". I would argue that "reducing the property portfolio" works better here. You could, I suppose, say "relinquishing property assets", or somesuch, but that actually seems inaccurate, as it's not about getting rid of property 'just for the heck of it', but specifically eliminating the category that they can make a profit on (which I guess *is* investment property at the end of the day, even if wasn't acquired with that purpose?).

15:04 Feb 28, 2016 

Portfolio suggests it is an investment, while asset would indicate that it is something they own, and can dispose of, for whatever reason. I think the latter is probably more accurate in this case.

14:54 Feb 28, 2016 

The company is a transport provider. They're talking about property that isn't directly related to their core activities. For example, the waterways authorities in the UK have office buildings, lockhouses etc., but have also profited from the sale of canalside property, which arguably does not form part of their core business.

How about "the commercial exploitation of the property portfolio"?

14:35 Feb 26, 2016 

If the end client is a property developer, you should indeed think along the lines proposed by TextNed below.

Refer also to http://www.cobouw.nl/artikel/1144451-ovg-en-rabo-wisselen-va... where vastgoedpositie is used as a synonym for ontwikkellocatie (property development location/site) and aandelen (i.e. aandelenbelang > shareholding(s) / equity interest) respectively.

14:18 Feb 26, 2016 

In an investment-related context - and please trust me on this one, as I've worked on many projects in this field over the years - translating positie/posities (in) [industry/geographical region/market cap X] as exposure (to) would definitely be a good option and, unlike you seem to assume, it doesn't have a negative implication as such (as opposed to 'exposure' as used f.i. in 'risk exposure'). Thus, in the context of investment fund strategies and the corresponding allocation/spread/weighting of assets in a fund's portfolio, it would be perfectly acceptable to say things like We plan to increase our exposure to (...).

That being said, on the basis of the additional context information provided by asker, it has now become clear to me that this solution doesn't fit the bill here.

It would be helpful if asker could further specify the type of company/activities involved, which IMO should be possible without naming the client and/or breaching any confidentiality obligations.

12:51 Feb 26, 2016 

Als het niet over beleggingen maar over investeringen gaat, bijvoorbeeld van een bouwbedrijf, kan je "de exploitatie van vastgoedposities" mogelijk met "property development activities" vertalen.

12:06 Feb 26, 2016 

How does a 'positie' (asset) imply 'exposure'? That is a negative implication, and that the portfolio is probably at risk of downgrading. It definitely wouldn't fit in the context of this link, for example http://www.participaties.nl/forum/Topic/1110499/Heijmans_Hei...

02:50 Feb 26, 2016 

but not an investment fund.

17:45 Feb 25, 2016 

If this is about an investment fund/firm, 'posities' often can be translated as 'exposure to'. So in this specific case: exposure to real estate / real estate exposure. Thinking along the same lines, holdings in real estate might be another option.

17:36 Feb 25, 2016 

They're talking specifically about no longer wishing to deal with properties that cannot be used in the context of their core business activities.