CUTTING LOSS After the power cost increase KEPCO is expected to cut

CUTTING LOSS After the power cost increase, KEPCO is expected to cut itsyearly loss to 478.1 billion won ($373.2 million) from an initialforecast of 1.14 trillion won. It posted a net loss of 888.2 billion won in the three monthsto March this year, lagging far behind Reuters’ forecast of a 25billion won net profit. [ID:nSEO244687] South Korea will also introduce a new electricity pricingsystem that moves in line with global energy feedstock prices toease the burden of high fuel costs on state-run companies fromthe beginning of 2010, the ministry said. Shares in KEPCO were up 1.0 percent as of 0300 GMT,outpeforming the wider market’s0.2 percent drop. (Reporting by Angela Moon; Editing by Chris Lewis) South Korea.

(Adds company confirmation) Stocks  |  Japan * Rohm says proposal from Brandes rejected * Rohm opposed the move in June TOKYO, June 26 (Reuters) – Japanese speciality chip makerRohm Co Ltd (6963.OS) said on Friday its shareholders rejected a$156 million share buyback proposal by U.S. investment fundBrandes Investment Partners.Brandes, which has $42.4 billion under management including astake in Rohm, had proposed that cash-rich chip maker buy back upto 2.5 million of its own shares for a maximum 15 billion yen. A large majority of investors voted against the proposal, aspokeswoman said. Rohm opposed the proposal in June, saying it needed a cashlevel of about 150 million yen for capital spending and research,as well as to fund its restructuring of Oki Electric IndustryCo’s (6703.T) chip business and potential acquisitions. It had about 262 billion yen in cash and cash equivalents atthe end of March.

Rohm, Japan’s eighth-biggest chip maker, last year boughtOki’s microchip operations for 86 billion yen to bolster itscustom chip lineup with system LSI chips used for digitalconsumer applications. Brandes has assets worth $9.5 billion in Japaneseinvestments, which have included Ono Pharmaceutical Co (4528.OS),Hibiya Engineering Ltd (1982.T) and Mitsui Sumitomo InsuranceGroup Holdings (8725.T). ($1=95.99 Yen)(Reporting by Mayumi Negishi; Editing by Joseph Radford) Stocks Japan. — Alexander Smith is a Reuters columnist.

The views expressed are his own — DealsBy Alexander SmithLONDON (Reuters) – Investment banks are going to have a lot of explaining to do. After the lows of 2008, and despite the mauling they’ve had from politicians and the public, 2009 is going to be a bumper year for those that lived to tell the tale. The banks have pocketed an incredible $16 billion in fees in the second quarter, according to Thomson Reuters first half data on deals and fee income, released on Friday.True, this is down from Q2 2008, when fees were almost $24 billion. But it should not come as a surprise to anyone who has been watching — often in disbelief — the huge amount of capital raising that has been going on in both the equity and bond markets.Take the bond markets, where total first-half issuance — excluding financials — has already reached $598 billion, outstripping previous records for an entire year.

If anyone pretends it has been tough selling these bonds, don’t believe them. The sales teams have been pushing at an open door, with fund managers buying anything they could get their hands on. The fees are good and so far this year, the risk has been limited.The ones to suffer have been the loan desks, with syndicated lending hitting a 13-year low. But since this market has always been seen as a loss-leader to help sell other products, there are probably fewer tears being shed at the top of the banks involved.The real star of the show, however, has been equity capital markets. Traditionally the poor cousins to the sexier and higher profile “rainmakers” in mergers and acquisitions, ECM desks have raked in underwriting fees of $7.6 billion in Q2 alone, almost half the industry total. As with bond issues, lead managing or underwriting such deals does carry a risk, but so far this year that has been limited as shareholders have lapped up the rights issues.There’s no denying that many companies badly needed capital and that the banks have the expertise to get these deals done. The question that will increasingly be asked is whether the fee structure can still be justified.