The defendant also defines the property as "advances" in paragraph 90 of its summaries:
"... The payments made by Agrexco to the growers beyond what they were expected to be entitled to at the end of the season were not "losses" or "bonuses" for the past, but advances at the expense of the next season that created a trust, and were therefore rightly classified as an asset on the balance sheet and not as an immediate expense in a profit and loss statement ([P, p. 887, s. 20 - p. 888, s. 4; p. 681, s. 24 - p. 682, s. 10)."
And in CPA Gev's interrogation by CPA Aviv, CPA Gav notes that the special payments (in the form of a "good price") were given because it was good for competition (CPA Gev's interrogation, Appendix 7 to Aviv's opinion, at p. 40):
"Haim Camille: ... I'm a grower now and you're Agrexco, come and describe to me the process following which you give me money, in order to maintain my faith, what do you tell me?
John: I'm not saying anything.
Haim Kamil: Just giving it to me?
John: I give it to you.
Haim Kamil: Why are you giving it to me?
John: The competition is better, it gives you a good price."
And sometimes it is argued that this is a business incentive intended to maintain long-term relationships (in paragraph 89 of the defendant's summaries):
"The additional sums paid to Migdal as an incentive intended to purchase its continued 'loyalty' to the company; And in this respect, the growers are analog to the customers, since the continued engagement with them was essential for the company's continued existence."
- From all of these alleged definitions, a common denominator emerges: a claim of the existence of a "growers' trust", which was supposed to ensure, according to the defendant, the continued supply of produce and the production of future economic benefits. Therefore, for the purpose of discussion and decision, the alleged resource is the loyalty of the growers or the expectation of continuing to engage with them. This is what emerges, inter alia, from the interrogation of CPA Gav by the investigator CPA Aviv (Appendix 7 to the opinion of CPA Aviv, at pp. 36-37 of CPA Gav's interrogation):
"Haim Kamil: Yohanan, if I tell you about the pepper growers just as an example. That these guys in any given year, in any given year, whoever gives them a shekel more at the gate of the field, will take their goods. Regardless of anything, I mean, if I'm right and leave for a moment whether I'm right or not, but if I'm right, it doesn't matter how much you've poured out on them in the past. It has no property and it has nothing.