UNCTAD's Annual Report on investment cases for 2012 shows again a record year with 58 new arbitrations out of a total of 514 known cases. Since its beginning when it was almost dormant in the eighties, investment arbitration has surged. As a result, it has attracted public attention and given rise to debate and criticism. One discerns essentially three categories of reasons: first, the multiplicity of actors; second, the multiplicity of legal bases or sources of the claims; and, third, the multiplicity of available fora. Under the rubric of blessing, one might argue that the multiplicity of proceedings maximizes or at least diversifies the chances of success for the investor in the sense that if the investor does not succeed in one forum, he may still prevail in another. Conversely, the multiplicity minimizes or diversifies the risk of loss for the state.