Zeiger testified that in the phone conversations that took place between him and Nahum, along with the email correspondence, Zeiger and Nahum argued regarding the manner in which the sales profits were distributed to the project. Nahum wanted to divide half and half, and Zeiger tried to persuade – so he claimed – that such a division was illogical in view of the ratio between the actual costs of the servers (two-thirds for X servers and one-third for Unix servers) (Zeiger, p. 5348, s. 3 - p. 5349, s. 1).
Let's go back to the email correspondence.
(7) In the evening (20:50), Nahum wrote to Zeiger:
"Yossi.
I don't want to be misled.
I'm checking whether the ratio is really two-thirds for Blades / and one-third for Unix or not.
I want to make a half-and-half criminal case, but about accurate data and I don't want to fight afterwards."
(underline added).
(8) The next day, 14 February 2012, in the morning (09:37), Zeiger sought to clarify the matter:
"What is half and half that I buy from you and sell [to] Elta?"
(9) Nahum replied to this a few minutes later (09:41) in a way that makes the intention of the parties very clear:
"You buy half of me and sell it to Elta.
I give your own high offers in arrangement.
You win.
I provide you half the price of the reservation.
There will also be coordination with IBM.
They must not know." (underline added)
This email clearly attests to the arrangement that has been reached between the parties: Triple C will sell to Harel half of the project's content (including, as we will immediately see the Unix servers as well), at the same time Triple C will submit a higher price quote than Harel's, so that Harel will win the project, when it is explicitly clarified that it is forbidden for Alta to know about the coordination.
Zeiger did not dispute in his testimony that Nahum's intention was that the parties would coordinate the prices of the bids so that Triple C would submit a high bid that would lead to Harel's win, and that this should have been concealed from Elta (p. 5355, s. 1 - p. 5356, s. 10, and see the answers there to the court's questions, see also: p. 6054, s. 30 - p. 6055, S. 32; In fact, according to the Zeiger version, in a situation where one supplier (Harel) supplies Elta with equipment purchased from another supplier (Triple C), ELTA must be informed and its approval must be obtained (p. 6035, paras. 20-21, p. 5340, paras. 24-26; although it was not clarified whether this is the case even in the case of servers that are not new); Against this background, he confirmed that the phrase "they must not know" refers to the coordination of the proposals and not to the purchase from one supplier to another, p. 5355, s. 1 - p. 5356, s. 10).