The attempt to disconnect between Gendelman's bids and future procurement and competition should not be accepted. Gendelman testified – also with regard to the charge now under discussion – that the initial price offers he receives are subsequently transferred to the procurement body and on the basis of which the procurement initiates the negotiations (p. 846, paras. 10-16, p. 851, s. 28 - p. 852, s. 3, p. 871, s. 24 - p. 872, s. 11, where he testified that in many cases these initial offers lead to actual procurement). In fact, in our case, Gilad also sent Harel's price quote directly to Shaknevsky, who was a procurement buyer in Maman and the relevant procurement entity (P/101, see Gendelman, ibid.; and see also P/102, where Shachar mentioned Shkanevsky as someone who was involved in the requested request for price quotes and the purchase of the old servers). In other words, the (coordinated) offer was also transferred directly to the procurement entity, which is in charge of the pricing and procurement process.
In addition, the very coordination between Shahar and Gilad undermines the implicit claim that this is an initial stage devoid of any importance, significance or potential for influencing the competition. If not, why did Shahar and Gilad bother to coordinate? This is also clear from the testimony of Shahar, which was brought above, according to which the coordination was intended to bring about Value winning the transaction at the end of the day by making the price of its offer lower than the price of Harel's offer (see paragraph 874 above). Another argument, which arose in the course of the interrogation of Attorney Harel and Shahar (e.g., pp. 3420-3422), that in the bid submitted by Gilad (P/101) he tried to fight and win the deal, contradicts the argument now under discussion, according to which this is a stage that has no connection, affinity or influence on the competition.
In view of all of the above, the defense's arguments above should be rejected.
- A second argument that also arose as a thesis that Harel presented to Shahar at the time of his cross-examination is that Gilad tried to compete and fight the proposal (e.g., pp. 3419-3422). According to the claim, Harel's bid also included components of regulation and warranty, which were not included in Wie's bid and which could make Harel's bid cheaper and testify – this is the claim – that Gilad tried to compete (ibid.).
This argument has no basis.