Hence, contrary to what is claimed, it is clear from Mordechai's testimony and from all the evidence that in Balam Indra price quotes were asked - real offers - for the purpose of pricing between the suppliers, even if Mordechai believed that the potential for the effect of such competition was not as great as that of competition between the manufacturers. Moreover, no real evidence was presented to support the claim that Mordechai acted to receive fictitious price quotes or that he knew about the coordination correspondence between the defendants. On the contrary.
We have seen above that Mordechai testified that he did not know in real time until the interrogation about the coordination of the price proposals, and that when he was presented with the matter in his interrogation, he felt deceived and believed that we were dealing with "tricksters and thieves" who had made a "combination" against him (in paragraph 142 above). In his testimony, he said that "I thought I was competing between suppliers and manufacturers... I didn't know there was any agreement between them..." (p. 1262, paras. 4-7). Elsewhere he testified that Indra chose the Wii after "she was the cheapest because of Shahar's coordinations and tricks...", p. 1195, paras. 18-23, p. 1198, paras. 21-22). Mordechai's testimony was reliable and consistent with the evidence. It provides further support for the fact that the speaker was in a competitive proceeding in respect of which improper coordination was made without Mordechai's knowledge. In parentheses: The evidence showed that at the end of 2009, including during the conduct of Indra, Shahar and Mordechai worked to examine the possibility of jointly establishing a business venture (P/105, N/106, N/107) that was not carried out at that time. In this state of affairs, it is possible that there is a reason for the defect in the fact that Mordechai exists for Elta and Indra a proceeding in which Shachar, on behalf of Wei, participates. However, in the circumstances of the case, this does not change the conclusion that Indra was a competitive proceeding and that Mordechai did not know about the coordination correspondence. Moreover. At the time of his testimony, Mordechai was no longer working in a civil appeal (pp. 1176, paras. 14-24) and was Shahar's partner in the business they jointly established at the end of 2018 (pp. 1174-1175). At this point in time, Mordechai allegedly had an interest in trying to benefit Shahar in his testimony, including trying to present Shachar's actions as legitimate and not as improper coordination without IAI's knowledge, without fear for his status in a civil appeal that he had already left. Despite the aforesaid, he reiterated that Shahar coordinated the proposals and tricked him, without his knowledge, in a way that could give too much weight to the statements.