Following its winning of the tender, it was Wei that carried out the installation and upgrading of NetApp systems at the Mapi and installed the "heads", the "brain", of the storage system (Koren, p. 581, paras. 7-10; see also the e-mail correspondence N/355, N/57, N/255, which relate to the activity carried out by Wei about a year later).
After winning, Wei purchased the shelving component from EMET – as stated above, in the framework of the 2010 tender, the winner was required to upgrade the NetApp systems, including the system's 'heads', in addition to providing a number of shelves that were part of the tender's contents. In practice, it seems, Wii purchased the shelves component that it supplied to the Mapi of the M.A.M.T. and not directly from Mantap (N/354, a price quote sent by Rubinstein to Shahar for the shelves on December 20, 2010, i.e., some time after Wei won the 2010 tender). The reason why Wei purchased the shelves from EMET and not directly from Mantap was not really clarified. It was clear from Oshri's testimony that he did not remember the details of the matter. Oshri testified that Noy asked Shachar for a purchase value for the shelving component from A.M.T., at the same price that NetApp offered to accompany the shelves, so that the value would not be harmed by this, and this was apparently due to some agreement on the matter between Noy and A.M.T. Oshri testified that he did not know the reason for making the purchase in this manner and speculated that there might have been a business debt between NetApp and EMET (p. 4570, s. 1 - p. 4572, s. 20). From the evidence, it appears that this was a purchase plan that was made retroactively, after winning the 2010 tender. No substantial evidentiary basis was presented for the fact that the matter was raised or discussed prior to the submission of the bids for the 2010 tender.
- In summary: At the end of 2010, Wii won the 2010 tender for upgrading NetApp systems at the Mapi and was the one who installed the system's 'brain'. This was about nine months prior to the Mapi tender – Tender A/357, which deals with the addition of CDs to NetApp – which is the focus of the indictment currently under discussion.
(For the sake of completeness of the picture, it should be noted that Oshri claimed in his testimony that the need to expand the system and purchase additional storage racks – which are the subject of a 2011 Mapi tender – arose following a recommendation by an engineer on behalf of Wei who installed the system at Mappi, p. 4574, s. 23 – p. 4575, s. 2, p. 5142, s. 16-19; this point is of limited importance for our matter; in any event, it should be noted that it was not substantially supported by the evidence that was presented: The e-mail correspondence to which Wei referred – N/355, N/57, N/255 – did not include a summary of Wee's activity and recommendations, and they were made about a month after Mapi decided to issue a tender for the addition of CDs (P/71, S. 1). In any case, as stated above, this point is not central to our matter).