Kelsee, I'm confused and not sure if my post has been misinterpreted.

All that I was responding to was Hartland and KBC and a number of posts they had made under the title of "Michael Sweeney (disgruntled employee)" but their subject was whether someone was accumlating shares at TD. Please don't get me wrong here Hartland and KBC. I enjoy and value your posts.

Here are the posts:

KBC – Apr 8, 3:17TD "...I think we can move from here as the stability seems ro be here WITH TD ACCUMULATING..."

TD isn't "accumulating". TD is a brokerage. One or more of their retail customers bought some shares. It doesn't mean anything and isn't a sign of stability.

KBC – Apr8 7:57 - "I know perfectly well who TD are my polnt was that that house has been a consistent buyer at these prices, for one or more accounts. "

Ya well, none of that's true. I was the buyer of the last 10,560 shares yesterday. That was a third of the day's volume. My brokerage was TD Waterhouse. The choice of brokerage was completely arbitrary.

I have accounts with a 2nd brokerage. I could have purchased the shares through them instead. If I had used the 2nd brokerage, would they have been "accumulating shares"? Of course not.

Yesterday's buying wasn't part of any pattern of TD Waterhouse being a "consistent buyer". The brokerage is completely irrelevant.

Now, if you want to claim a particular brokerage is buying shares for their OWN accounts, you'd have to offer some evidence of that. Otherwise it's nothing but speculation. And, as we saw yesterday, not true.

Hartland – Apr 8 – 7:58 -I never said they were.TD has been the brocker on the buy side to the greatest extent in the last while it is reasonable to assume that they have one or more clients willing to buy

<!--[if gte mso 10]> <style> /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0cm; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-ascii-font-family:Cambria; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast; mso-hansi-font-family:Cambria; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;} </style> <![endif]-->

So I have no problem with that discussion but I suggested that the title for those posts should be something like "Someone Accumulating at TD".

The second point I tried to make is that based on the new director, Ms Biln, she made a very positive statement about the morale and enthusiasm and the advanced R & D at RVX (hence by implication Zenith as well). So based on this and Dr Sweeney's excellent BOM presentation at the RVX update I drew my own conclusion that Dr Sweeney is probably very enthused and not the least but disgruntled. The is my personal conclusion.

So as I say I am confused. If you folks want to ban me then no problem because I'll use SH and some of go back an forth anyway. I truly value everyones posts and strongly urge critical analysis positive or negative.

Cheers to all and enjoy the weekend.

Toinv :)