Two routes to the title compounds are evaluated. First, a ca. 0.01 M CH₂Cl₂ solution of H₃B·P((CH₂)₆CH=CH₂)₃ (1·BH₃) is treated with 5 mol % of Grubbs' first generation catalyst (0 °C to reflux), followed by H₂ (5 bar) and Wilkinson's catalyst (55 °C). Column chromatography affords H₃B·P(n-C₈H₁₇)₃ (1%), H₃B·P((CH₂)₁₃CH₂)(n-C₈H₁₇) (8%; see text for tie bars that indicate additional phosphorus–carbon linkages, which are coded in the abstract with italics), H₃B·P((CH₂)₁₃CH₂)((CH₂)₁₄)P((CH₂)₁₃CH₂)·BH₃ (6·2BH₃, 10%), in,out-H₃B·P((CH₂)₁₄)₃P·BH₃ (in,out-2·2BH₃, 4%) and the stereoisomer (in,in/out,out)-2·2BH₃ (2%). Four of these structures are verified by independent syntheses. Second, 1,14-tetradecanedioic acid is converted (reduction, bromination, Arbuzov reaction, LiAlH₄) to H₂P((CH₂)₁₄)PH₂ (10; 76% overall yield). The reaction with H₃B·SMe₂ gives 10·2BH₃, which is treated with n-BuLi (4.4 equiv) and Br(CH₂)₆CH=CH₂ (4.0 equiv) to afford the tetraalkenyl precursor (H₂C=CH(CH₂)₆)₂(H₃B)P((CH₂)₁₄)P(BH₃)((CH₂)₆CH=CH₂)₂ (11·2BH₃; 18%). Alternative approaches to 11·2BH₃ (e.g., via 11) were unsuccessful. An analogous metathesis/hydrogenation/chromatography sequence with 11·2BH₃ (0.0010 M in CH₂Cl₂) gives 6·2BH₃ (5%), in,out-2·2BH₃ (6%), and (in,in/out,out)-2·2BH₃ (7%). Despite the doubled yield of 2·2BH₃, the longer synthesis of 11·2BH₃ vs 1·BH₃ renders the two routes a toss-up; neither compares favorably with precious metal templated syntheses.