A man and his friend decided to commit a robbery. They agreed that the friend would hide in the bushes along a dark street and jump in front of the intended victim, and the man would block the victim from behind. Unbeknownst to the man, his friend had a gun.

A short time later, a woman walked down the street and the friend jumped in front of her. Before the man could approach the woman, the friend lifted his shirt and showed a gun in his waistband. The woman ran away.

In this jurisdiction, the crime of conspiracy requires proof of the following: 1) two or more persons entered into an agreement with the specific intent to accomplish an unlawful purpose, and 2) at least one conspirator committed an overt act in furtherance of the agreement. This jurisdiction's conspiracy statute requires proof of the existence of a bilateral conspiracy.

The statute in this jurisdiction defines robbery as "the unlawful taking of property from the person of another through the use of threat or force, but not by means of a firearm."

The statute in this jurisdiction defines armed robbery as "the unlawful taking of property from the person of another through the use of threat or force by means of a firearm."

What conspiracy offense, if any, can the man properly be convicted of having committed?

A) Conspiracy to commit armed robbery only.

B) Conspiracy to commit robbery only.

C) Either conspiracy offense.

D) Neither conspiracy offense.