a pagamento

02:53 Feb 8, 2013 

I think you do need to be a pro in the business to know who xxxDCypher is and whether you can trust him just as you need to know how to spell to know that when you Google potatos it is wrong. I happen to know that he has an MBA and knows what he is talking about. However, here the context is specific and there is a better translation for this specific context, which only a real pro would know. I owe my knowledge of this translation to Richard Hall http://www.proz.com/profile/38199 a chartered accountant and former investment banker.

14:34 Feb 7, 2013 

there are many pro questions for which you may apparently find an answer in a dictionary or try googling. the point in my opinion is the underlying knowledge you need in choosing a term
by the way the link proposed by Thomas is proof of this:
1- the answer is different from the one proposed here
2- it mentions something that is not really relevant here, i.e. the concept of paid in capital
this is enough to show that there is a certain confusion over this term :)

13:17 Feb 7, 2013 

you don't need to be a pro to find for example this answer on google
http://www.proz.com/kudoz/italian_to_english/finance_general...

13:14 Feb 7, 2013 

@Moderators, we now have two pro votes to three non-pro votes which makes a balance of just two.

08:27 Feb 7, 2013 

a pro-question-
@JIm- I did not proposed another answer because in the end for cash is perfect here. I just thought it was important to point out that you may very well find an "a pagamento" which is not for cash -
a pagamento is a broader category, but pragmatic anglosaxons don't like asbtract categories, they need to put something in there!

23:40 Feb 5, 2013 

In the context, I think that only people familiar with language and terminology typical of rights issue prospectuses and similar documents can answer this question with confidence. If it generates discussion and disagreement between specialists in the field, then it can hardly be a non-pro question.

23:37 Feb 5, 2013 

We have three non-pro votes and one pro vote which makes two, which is not sufficient for a change.

23:27 Feb 5, 2013 

The more I think about it, the more I think "for cash" is best in the context of a rights issue, because the purpose of rights issues is precisely that of raising cash. To use terminology connected with payment in kind might even confuse a reader, just as I am getting confused trying to imagine a rights issue which isn't for cash.
"Subject to the provisions of the Companies Acts, any equity securities issued by the Company for cash must first be offered to Shareholders in proportion to their holdings of Ordinary Shares."

http://www.barrattdevelopments.co.uk/barratt/dlibrary/docume...

23:14 Feb 5, 2013 

Of course you are technically right, but this is a rights issue! I find it difficult to imagine a rights issue with payment in kind, unless it is some kind of share swap. I think it is for cash almost by definition.
If in the contex it is for cash, then the word native English speakers would expect to see in this context and is what they would write in an equivalent document and that is for cash.
https://www.google.com/search?source=ig&rlz=&q="rights issue...
Clearly if this particular case is for payment in kind then you couldn't use cash.
https://www.google.com/search?source=ig&rlz=&q="rights issue...

14:34 Feb 5, 2013 

this is what I mean:
a pagamento: may be paid in cash or in kind . hence, technically just saying cash is not correct- better against payment, for payment etcc.
gratuito: it is carried out using the reserves

14:23 Feb 5, 2013 

I agree with you, using reserves or any monies due to shareholders

14:13 Feb 5, 2013 

Capitale a pagamento may also be paid in kind and not in cash. The technical difference between a pagamento and gratuito is that in the gratuito the increase in capital is made using the reserves.