“…Similar coordination motifs have been previously observed for [Zr 2 F 12 ] 4– in [Co((NH 2 ) 2 C 2 H 4 ) 3 ] 2 [Zr 2 F 12 ][SiF 6 ]·4H 2 O and for [MF 4 (OS(CH 3 ) 2 ) 2 ] 2 (M = Zr, Hf). , Although the Mo–Mo distance [exptl 3.4981(3); calcd 3.518 Å] is much smaller than the sum of the van der Waals radii [ R vdW (Mo) = 2.1 Å], the bond angles of the four-membered ring [F b –Mo–F b , exptl 65.21(5)°, calcd 65.2°; Mo–F b –Mo, exptl 114.79(5)°, calcd 114.8°], the low Wiberg bond index (WBI = 0.01), and the negligible (3.3 kJ mol –1 ) donor–acceptor interaction, as determined by second-order perturbation theory of the natural bond orbital (NBO) analysis, collectively indicate that no significant bonding character is present between the Mo centers. Conversely, an appreciably smaller Mo–Mo distance [2.533(1) Å] is observed in the octahedral Mo III complex [MoF 3 (NC 5 H 5 ) 2 ] 2 , which thus contains a substantial bonding interaction . MoF 5 (NC 5 H 5 ) 2 , [MoF 5 (NC 5 H 5 )] 2 , and MoOF 4 (NC 5 H 5 ) 2 represent the first neutral adducts of MoF 5 and the first heptacoordinate adduct of MoOF 4 , respectively, to be conclusively characterized.…”