During the meeting, Wei agreed to give Elta a discount of about 15% compared to her previous offer, i.e., to reduce about $60,000 from the price (Oshri, p. 4589, s. 11-12, p. 4590, s. 6-11; Kniturk, p. 421, s. 9-23; Shahar, p. 3286, s. 1-4; see also the description in P/50 regarding a discount of $60,000 in relation to Wie's initial offer; in the diary documentation of the meeting, N/358, N/372 (second page) recorded a meeting "in Elta with Shlomi and Ilan – Closing a Deal").
Shachar's version at the time of his testimony, as if Shkedi said at the meeting that Knitwerk needed more proposals for the case (p. 3286, paras. 4-14), will be discussed later. It should be noted that this is a suppressed, unreliable version that should be rejected, and that even the defendants did not seek to build on it in their summaries.
- Tender Exemption Proceedings - On June 20, 2010, Knitwerk submitted an application for exemption from a tender. The application was submitted to the members of the tender exemption committee in Elta (N/14). Knitork testified that in view of the purchase amount, it was required to request an exemption from a tender (p. 349, 10-13).
In the application, which was titled "Description of the Contents of the Procurement File", Knitork wrote in his own handwriting the details of the procurement (P/14, p. 350, paras. 3-4). Among other things, he noted that the scope of the expected purchase is $360,990, that this is equipment for an existing customer, that "it is not possible to purchase new computers, but is obligated by the customer to purchase models identical to the ones he uses," and that the main suppliers are: Wii, Harel and Triple C. In the field of a single vendor, a "wee" was specified. In the comments, Knitwerk noted that "an inventory of replenished servers was located at Alltrade. The inventory was physically inspected by the project personnel and R.P. Moti Vered, as well as a procurement representative. The servers were found to be in good condition that met the requirements of the project. Negotiations were held with three companies." In the place designated for the approval of the head of the field, Shkedi wrote down the clause that is appropriate to his understanding for granting an exemption from a tender: there is no Israeli manufacturer of technology, and noted that "this is a competition between three suppliers for equipment manufactured abroad" (N/14, Kniturk, p. 349, paras. 12-13, Shkedi, p. 1868, paras. 11-12).