“…The nature of the negatively charged ligand coordinated in axial positions to the rare earth seems to be a predominant criterion for the optimization of the magnetic properties of these systems. This is clearly illustrated by the Dy III complexes [DyX 1 X 2 (THF) 5 ]·BPh 4 (with X 1 = Cl, OPh, OCMe 3 and OSiMe 3 ; X 2 = Cl, Br, OPh, OCMe 3 and OSiMe 3 ; Table 10, entries 17, 18, 21, 22, 27 and 28) 144–147 and [DyX 2 (THF) 5 ]·BPh 4 (X 2 = CH 3 (C 6 F 5 )CHO − , pyrazolate, PhO − , Me 3 CO − , Me 3 SiO − , Table 10, entries 19, 20, 24, 26, 29 and 30, 34). 143–146 When one and then the two axial Cl − ligands of [DyCl 2 (THF) 5 ] + are replaced by phenolate ligands to give [DyCl(PhO)(THF) 5 ] + and [Dy(PhO) 2 (THF) 5 ] + , respectively, the effective energy barrier for magnetization reversal, U eff / k B , increases from 83 K to 1329 K with a blocking temperature shift from 7 K to 12 K. 145 This trend is corroborated by the remarkable results obtained for [Dy(CH 3 CH(C 6 F 5 )O) 2 (THF) 5 ]·BPh 4 (entry 34), where the Dy–alkoxyl bond distance is shorter.…”