The following are some of the points to work on for the case. The main point is to (1) understand what made Peregrine fail and (2) assess the motives and decision behind the potential equity investment by Zurich Insurance. Of course, you are encouraged to work on other aspects of the case as well:

1. What were the risks in the capital structure of Peregriine? Too much debt? Too much short-term or too much long-term debt? What about leverage?

2. Currency risks: was Peregrine's portfolio of holdings too vulnerable to currency fluctuations? Can you show some examples to illustrate how sensitive the Peregrine portfolio was to currency fluctuations (in relation to Rupiah, for example)?

3. What were the risks inherent in underwriting corporate bonds by first taking the "bought deals"? Compare this approach with syndicated underwriting. How significant was the Steady Safe bond deal to Peregrine's fall?

4. Anything wrong or inproper in the incentive structure for Andre Lee? He obviously was given a cash bonus, but not equity shares in Peregrine? Was this responsible in any way in the failure of Peregrine?

5. Would it have made a difference if Mr. Tose had re-organized the Peregrine firm around regional lines rather than product lines? How much  proper oversight and controls were there in terms of the operational procedures and structure at Peregrine?

6. Did Mr. Gluckstern do the right thing in first coming up with a deal to rescue Peregrine and then re-doing all the valuations and stress tests? Was his valuation appropriate? Did he take into account all the risk factors at the moment? Should he have done more stress tests on the currency risk front?