Requesting quotes from several suppliers is also intended to check the price offered to Elta by Wee. Under the circumstances, when it comes to old servers, it becomes even more important. When it comes to servers that are not yet manufactured, there is no clear or nominal market price, and the supplier can actually quote any price it deems appropriate (Knitürk, p. 344, paras. 10-13, p. 414, paras. 15-19; Shohat, p. 6878, paras. 20-23; Rosenthal, p. 6687, paras. 11-17). The issuance of Balam and the execution of pricing in this state of affairs are important for the purpose of examining the price offered to Elta (Kniturk, p. 344, paras. 10-13). To this, it should be added that the civil appeal had no previous experience with Ultratrade (Vered, p. 6384, paras. 14-17, p. 6399, s. 6, previously sought a civil appeal for such equipment from dealers from abroad, p. 6409, paras. 17-22, where it was noted that the examination of bids for new servers can also serve as an indication for the purpose of estimating the price offered, unlike the one that appears at p. 6400, paras. 14-19; Rosenthal, p. 6683, paras. 10-12). In addition, these were servers that were located in Altrade, which was not itself an authorized supplier of IAI, and only because of this, the purchase was made via Wii. In these circumstances, Levi itself was not a real added value in relation to other providers (Oshri, p. 4584, paras. 22-27, p. 4590, s. 22 - p. 4591, s. 2; Rosenthal, p. 6682, s. 24-27, s. 31 - p. 6683, s. 5, p. 6683, s. 31-32; see also Shahar's testimony, p. 2727, s. 19-21, according to which Levi did not have a contract with Alltrade promising to accompany the servers). This is an additional reason for conducting an inspection and receiving quotes from other suppliers.
As stated above, there is a practical reason on the part of the procurement company to try to check the existence of procurement alternatives, even if there is a question mark as to whether an alternative will be found and even if it is a "shot in the dark".