For 4, it remained unclear if the N,N-dimethyl-amine in 2-position of the pyridine ligand could contribute to the Co(II) ion coordination or if steric rigidity of the ligand frame would prevent chelation. Irrespective of these considerations that are addressed in the subsequent section in more detail, 3 -6 were received in good yields (75 % -90 %) when prior isolated 1 was converted with the respective Lewis base. The complexes were also accessible from one-pot syntheses using in-situ generated 1. However, this more direct approach resulted in lower yields due to a more difficult workup. Compounds 3 -6 demonstrated solution effective magnetic moments μeff of 4.26 μB to 4.75 μB (Table ) which is in a range often observed for [Co(TMSA)2L] type complexes. Exemplarily, the in situ procedure was tested for the reaction of 2 and DAD. Surprisingly, it was not the anticipated [Co(TMADS)2(DAD)] that was isolated, but a salt constituting itself as [Co(TMADS)3Li(DAD)2] and herein referred to as 7. It is a rare example of an ion separated Co(II) cobaltate salt with silylamide ligation and Li + counter cation (Scheme 3) and was obtained by crystallization in a yield of 58 %. While a few reports on [Co(TMSA)3] -anions with crown ether ligated Li + or Na + cationic counterparts can be found in the literature, [Co(TMADS)3] -ion separated complexes have not been reported yet. On the contrary, the formation of a [Li(DAD)2] + counter cation has been observed by Gardiner and co-workers in their study on neutral and anionic Al(III) diamine compounds. Table : Solution effective magnetic moments μeff of cobalt(II) title compounds derived from the Evans method. Compound μeff (μB) [Co(TMSA)3Li(15-crown-5)] containing the [Co(TMSA)3] -anion and crown ether ligated Li + cation exhibited an even higher µeff value of 5.25 μB at room temperature for solid samples.