First...I did not "assert wrongdoing" , that is an outright lie

unless his purchase was an error or improper.

Are you now giving "improper" a positive meaning or new definition?

There have been two purchases of 100,000 shares within days of a significant event, the filing of quarterly results. The timing and size of the purchases could indeed be total coincidence. There again, it could be the commencement of a structured buying plan initiated for 2009.

On the balance of probability, was the "error" of the first purchase simply repeated for a second time, with the required Form 4 filed on both occasions, or might there just be the very smallest chance that the trades meet the affirmative defenses criteria?

Should another "erroneous purchase" be made after the next results filing, I will be more than willing to contact Mr Bibeau to question his ongoing lapses of insider buying.

E&OE

Be well