Pith turns the company filings, sector distress reads, and restructuring-law reading you do under deadline into a per-engagement reading memory — auto-tagged, every claim linked to its source, briefable before the lender call.
A restructuring engagement is a deep, time-boxed dive into one distressed company, its sector, and the legal framework around it — StaRUG, the Insolvenzordnung, IDW S6, distressed M&A, creditor and lender mechanics — all moving at once and all under deadline. You read constantly: the company's numbers, the 13-week cash-flow picture, sector distress signals, the case law and the standards. That reading is the foundation of the restructuring opinion, but it lives in tabs, saved PDFs, and a folder nobody can search when the lender call is tomorrow. Pith makes that knowledge layer first-class. You bookmark while you read; Pith tags each save to the right engagement (auto), keeps a cited wiki per case current (auto) — the company, the sector, the law, every claim linked back to its source — and assembles a briefing before each meeting (on demand). PDFs go in via OCR; data stays in Frankfurt, Germany, and is never used to train models.
What changes for you
Scenario 1
Onboard onto a live distressed case in hours, not days
When you join a partner's engagement that's already three weeks deep into a StaRUG process, the wiki is already there: the company's liquidity position, the sector distress read, the IDW S6 scope, the creditor map, organised by concept and cited back to source. You read the wiki, not two weeks of saved PDFs and email. Onboarding onto a live case compresses from days of catching up to an afternoon — which matters when the engagement is time-boxed and the deadline does not move.
Scenario 2
Brief the partner before the lender call
The evening before the lender negotiation, generate an engagement briefing from the period's saved sources — the latest 13-week cash flow, the covenant position, the comparable distressed deals, the sector read-through. Text plus audio for the commute. The partner walks into the call current on what changed and where the numbers stand, each point linked back to the source, instead of skimming a backlog of PDFs that morning.
Scenario 3
Catch the moment two sources disagree on the numbers
One broker note puts the company's run-rate EBITDA one way; the management presentation puts it another; a sector report implies a third. As you save each, Pith's source-conflict detection flags that your sources disagree on the same figure — so you see the discrepancy before it lands in the IDW S6 opinion or the lender deck, and you can trace each version back to where it came from.
Founder's note
I built Pith because I was a consultant who could never find what I'd read when the meeting was tomorrow. Restructuring people live that at the hardest setting I've seen: a brand-new case every few weeks, a distressed company plus its sector plus a body of insolvency law to absorb, and a deadline that doesn't care that you only got the file on Monday. So I built the layer that keeps your reading cited, scoped to the engagement, and ready before the call — and that tells you when your sources don't agree.
FAQ
How does Pith handle confidentiality on a distressed mandate?
Bookmarks and wiki pages are workspace-scoped to your firm and engagement-tagged to the right case, isolated at the database level. Data lives in Frankfurt, Germany, and we never train models on your content. Distressed work is sensitive by nature — Pith treats every save as private to your workspace, and you apply your firm's policy to what you save.
How is this different from a Notion workspace per engagement?
Notion makes you author and maintain the page — a curation tax that gets skipped the week the case heats up. Pith's per-engagement wiki builds itself from the company filings, sector reads, and restructuring law you already read, keeps every claim cited, and stays current automatically. It's the reading-memory layer beneath the opinion, not another page someone has to keep up to date.
What happens when two sources disagree on a company's numbers?
Pith flags it. Source-conflict detection surfaces when your saved sources state different figures or outlooks for the same thing, with each version traced back to its bookmark — so a discrepancy in run-rate, liquidity, or covenant headroom shows up before it reaches the opinion or the lender deck, not after.
Does it work for a solo restructuring advisor?
Yes — a personal workspace with one tag per engagement is exactly the solo pattern. You get the cited per-case wiki, one-keystroke browser capture, PDF-via-OCR, and pre-meeting briefings with no team to manage; add the team later without rebuilding anything.
What happens when the engagement closes?
Archive the case. The wiki and bookmarks stay accessible for reference and retention but drop out of active filters, and you can export the engagement's knowledge as Markdown or JSON for your records. Reactivate any time — useful when a restructuring reopens or a related case lands in the same sector.
Related
Last reviewed: 9 June 2026