Things are clear. They are joined by Shachar's testimony that he asked Gilad to send Elta a price quote, at the price that Shachar mentioned, and that he did so "in order to apparently win the deal. that his price will be a little higher and mine will be lower" (p. 2905, paras. 24-27; Shachar's words later, paras. 31-32, that he does not remember the details of the case, do not detract from the explanation in the testimony that is clearly consistent with the documents).
- On November 15, 2011 – a short time after Shachar contacted him – Gilad replied to Shachar and wrote that Gendelman had asked him (Gilad) for a different configuration and a different number of units, adding, "I will stick to your prices and see what happens" (P/103, P/305, first page). In other words, Gilad agreed to submit Harel's offer to Gendelman in accordance with the prices sent to him by Shachar and the contents requested by Gendelman (see also Shahar's testimony, p. 2906, paras. 1-2).
- On November 16, 2011, Gilad sent Harel's price proposal to a civil appeal. Gilad sent the offer both to Gendelman of Alta and to Kashnevsky, a purchase purchase in Maman (P/101, which Sheknevsky also mentions in the correspondence that preceded it as someone who would handle the matter, P/102). Harel's offer was $ 61,609 , that is, at a price very close to what Shachar had sent to Gilad (ibid.; Gilad asked if the demand was serious and mature). As we will see immediately, Gilad later sent Shahar the proposal that he had actually submitted to Elta on behalf of Harel in order to show Shahar that he had met the agreement (P/104).
- On November 17, 2011, Gendelman contacted Shachar and asked him to send him a quote as soon as possible for the old servers that were required by Elta (P/100). In the email he sent to Shahar, Gendelman detailed the specifications of the contents required for the servers, copying the relevant technical details from Harel's proposal (Gendelman, p. 868, paras. 13-16, Gendelman mistakenly copied the words "installation in the Harel laboratory" from Harel's proposal, along with all the technical details; Shahar, p. 3421, paras. 10-14).
- On November 22, 2011 – even before Shachar submitted Wei's offer to Gendelman – Gilad sent Shahar the Harel offer in the sum of $61,609, as Gilad had submitted to Gendelman a few days earlier (P/104). In his testimony, Shahar confirmed what he said during the Authority's interrogation, according to which Gilad sent Shahar the offer he had actually submitted on behalf of Harel in order to show Shahar "that he (Gilad) does not work for me and that he submits what I asked him to submit", which is what they agreed to and this is what Gilad did (p. 2906, paras. 16-20, with reference to his statements from the interrogation P/557(6), paras. 545-549; The addition of the word "perhaps" at the beginning does not significantly detract from the weight of the clear things that arise from the Scriptures from a real time; The words that Shachar said in his cross-examination, p. 3421, paras. 6-7, while sweeping approval of what was offered to him, as if he did not see the offer that Gilad submitted to Elta, and as if Gilad was in fact trying to compete with Wee, stand in contradiction to Shachar's own testimony, to what he said in the Authority's interrogation, and to documents from real time. They are not to be accepted).
- On November 23, 2011 – after he was presented with the offer submitted by Gilad to Gendelman – Shachar sent Gendelman the price quote on behalf of Wei for a total of $60,840 (P/100). That is, a lower amount than the amount of Harel's bid, which was submitted in accordance with the price that Shahar sent to Gilad in advance (Shahar's offer matched the contents demanded by ELTA; as opposed to the contents initially stated in P/102, which was not suitable).
- The picture that emerges from the correspondence from real time is clear and unequivocal: Shahar and Gilad coordinated the prices of Harel's offer for servers for Elta so that Harel's prices would be higher than the prices of Wii's offer, so that Vale would be the one to supply the servers to Elta in the future. The arrangement was even carried out in practice when Gilad submitted a coordinated price quote to Elta and even forwarded it to Shahar in order to show him that he had acted in accordance with the agreement.
- Support for the above also emerges from Shahar's testimony. We saw above that Shahar testified that the correspondence between him and Gilad was intended for the value of the transaction and that the price of her offer would be lower than the price of Harel's offer (p. 2905, paras. 24-27), that Gilad acted in accordance with what they had agreed upon, and even sent Harel's offer to Shahar in order to show Shahar that he had acted as agreed (p. 2906, paras. 16-20). In addition, Shahar confirmed in his testimony what he said in the Authority's interrogation that Gilad and Harel agreed to give up the deal that is the subject of the indictment because Harel had won many projects at the time, and that Gilad knew that if he "continued to be a pig" in the end he would not win anything, because the competitors would do it to him and lower prices (p. 2906, paras. 21-30, where he confirmed his words from P/557(6), paras. 468-479, 2907, s. 30 - p. 2908, s. 25, p. 2908, s. 26-32; The attempt to undermine Shachar's cross-examination, pp. 3415-3422, on the basis of alleged differences between Harel's proposal and Wee's proposal (for which we will discuss below), and Shachar's automatic approval of the defense's thesis as if Gilad was trying to fight for the price quote, was unreliable and inconsistent with the clear evidence from real time).
- Gendelman testified that he did not know about the correspondence between Shachar and Gilad (p. 846, s. 29 - p. 847, s. 1) and that of course "it did not look good" (p. 855, s. 1-7). With regard to similar conduct, he noted that it was unfair conduct that if he had known about it, he would have unequivocally turned to his supervisor (p. 844, paras. 15-20).
Reference to the defense's arguments
- The defense raised, both in the summaries and in the course of the interrogations of the relevant witnesses, two main arguments. We will address these arguments.
- One defense argument was based on the testimony of Gendelman, a member of the Elta factory, that he does not compete between suppliers and that the suppliers knew this (p. 852, paras. 8-20), because he was not interested in the price differences between the bids (p. 850, s. 7, where he referred to considerable gaps; see also p. 855, paras. 1-7, and the attempt to build on the fact that he could not say whether the coordination harmed him, even though he immediately added that "it looks bad", see paras. 514-516 for the Wii summaries). It appears that in doing so, the defense sought to claim that Gendelman's request to receive price quotes was made at a pre-competitive stage, because the request was not made as part of a competitive process, not for the purpose of conducting negotiations or for the purpose of procurement. Therefore – this seems to be the argument – there is no concern of harm to competition and the elements of the offense of a restrictive arrangement are not met.
This argument should be rejected.