The result of all of the above is that the risk that Nisa will take on itself in the event that it decides to skew the value of a particular asset is not negligible, and it can serve as a real counterweight to its motivation, which is not very high to do so in the first place.
- Ness's Practical Ability to Skew the Value of Assets
Ness's practical ability to skew the value of a specific asset is also limited, for two main reasons.
The first reason relates to the fact that the valuation model proposed by Ness in its proposal is: "a valuation model with a fixed methodology, dependent on external and essentially independent variables, which leaves a relatively narrow room for maneuver for discretion", in the words of the tenders committee's decision. Indeed, a dispute arose among the respondent's various professionals on the question of the extent to which the model was objective, while in this matter a minority of the members of the subcommittee of the tenders committee held the opinion that the model leaves relatively broad discretion to Ness. However, in the end, the tenders committee accepted the position of its consultant on tender matters - Prof. Israeli - and I did not find that there was a flaw in the decision to accept his position, which was in line with the opinion of the majority of the members of the subcommittee. In this context, I will mention that a written opinion by Prof. Israeli was not prepared, and that no minutes of the meeting in which he expressed his position were prepared. However, as explained above, I do not believe that this is a defect that goes to the root of the matter. Here is also the place to note the fact that the examination of Ness's model and the examination of its possible conflict of interest were discussed in the subcommittee and in the tenders committee before the envelopes in which the Petitioner's and Ness financial proposals were opened, so there is no concern that the decisions on these issues were influenced by the fact that the Ness proposal was about 40% cheaper than the Petitioner's proposal.