Well James since you are asking.....,

I am waiting for the 60's.
Even though I did not buy them, I think the T-Birds were a good choice, judged by the response on this site.
My last purchase was the 67 Charger and the FM 65 Corvette last summer. Except for a few 50's ie 56 Dodge, 57, 58 Ford, 57 Olds I will probably just enjoy reading how happy other members are when they receive there dream 30's 40's or 50's whatever.
I say bring on the sixties full size cars to a whole new generation. Bring on the Grand Prix, Riviera, Toronado, Eldorado, Lincoln Mark series, Mercury fast backs, AMC's and a whole host of others waiting to be made.

I think an early second gen Camaro and a '70 Coronet are REALLY due....

These are two cars they can max out the tooling and get multiple images for their investment.

BALDWIN MOTION STYLE

Despite their relatively low 1:1 value, I think a 1st gen Riviera would be a blockbuster sales wise.

I just read that development costs average $1M per diecast issue.

I agree on the Riviera - it is widely recognized for it's beautiful styling. I think it would be a great seller.

I LOVE '70 Coronets. One of the coolest front ends EVER!

'70 Firebird/Camaro should be a no-brainer.

James...an interesting question. And since you asked, here is my 2 cents.
First of all, what my, or anyones opinions are as to what cars should be done is subjective at best. We all have certain cars that are meaningful to us in special ways and for a myriad of reasons. Put 100 car lovers in a room, ask this question, and you're likely to have (possilby) 100 different answers.

But I think the question that really needs to be answered is, which cars are no-brainers across the board by the vast majority of old car enthuiasists, and for whatever reason seem to be ignored.

A '63 Buick Riviera comes to mind. And so does the '66 Olds Toronado, to name two. Yet both seem to be not even on the radar at DM. And what about the '59 Pontiac, Olds, and Buick? All three should have been ready to go when 2009 dawned as spectacular limited anniversary editions.

Still another one I think that has slipped through the cracks is the '68 Mercury Cougar. Muscle cars have been released in abundance of many Mopars, and Mustangs, and Camaros and Firebirds too, but no Cougar. That stymies me.

And here's a question...
Why have certain model years been almost totally ignored altogether? How many American cars in 1.24 scale for 1952 have been produced? None that I'm aware of. And what about 1954? Only FM's Chevy comes immediately to mind.

Neither mint (other than WCPD's Chevy) has produced any 1962's. There were not hot-selling or good looking cars in 1962? I'd certainly beg to disagree if that were the thought. The same could be said for model year 1961. Other than a Lincoln, Chevy, and Thunderbird, there have been no '61's. Note: I've not counted Corvette's for 61, if there was one.

With regard to your comment about, if we could sit in the boardroom of DM and lend suggestions, my only thought is the LESS people that are involved in any discussion about which cars should be produced...the better it would be. Put more than 4 or 5 people on any committee, and it is pandomonium and they can't agree on where to go for lunch.

Not saying that all views and ideas are not important, but the more people that are involved in the decision making process, the less likely a consensus is had. This is why in the political arena, it always seems to take forever for important decisions to be made and bills, and laws to be passed.

Now as for each of our own personal "Wish Lists", well, we just have to, in most cases, keep wishing.

I'm in for the Gen I Riv.

I guess popular and innovative cars is where the Mints would look first....but how many mid 50's Chevies/Corvettes T-Birds can you make? I believe it is a business decision on what will bring in the most $$$ - period. Easy tooling - colors - assessories - and combined with popularity always considered first. I'd like to think they had alot of grey haired men sitting around offering advice - but doubt it - in fact - the decisions are made more on PAT (profit after tax) than anything else.

I agree with George early Tornados and Buick Rivieras would be hot sellers - but feel they may be too costly to produce..? and in real honesty - beyond my interest in Diecast issues - im a 40-50-some early 60's era enthusiast.

Definately agree with the Riviera and as I mentioned on another thread, we need early 60's first before we jump to the 70's. This is where our individual ages start to show up.

The vast amount of the time, I'm very impressed with

Danbury Mint's decisions regarding new releases and the variety they offer. However, and I'm sure it's just human nature, sometimes I think their decisions are a little too much based on their personal preferences when maybe the item is not potentially the most popular with us collectors. What I'm trying to say, is that I like most of their items and still purchase them but would have been happier if they had come out with some of the cars that are more in demand, like the Riviera, early 60's, etc. For example, when I see another PU, I like them and have most of them but would rather see those efforts spent on something else. JMO.

Great question! If I were appointed CEO of Danbury Mint...

... I know I'd approach it as I would any other business enterprise. I've spent most of my adult life in entrepreneurial pursuits so I'm familiar with the prudent evaluative process that would take place. That process would be too complicated (and boring) to detail here, but I'm certain that in the current economic climate I'd want to make sure that the next few issues are sales homeruns.

Steve mentioned that he recently read that the investment per issue is approximately $1 Million. I read that somewhere too but when I saw that number, I was surprised as that seems awfully high. Assuming a net profitability of $75/car (I think it's much lower), it would require sales volume of 13,333 to break even. More commonly, I've seen development numbers ranging between $100,000 and $200,000/issue. Those sales numbers would require 1333 to 2666 to break even; again assuming a profit of $75/car. Whatever the true development cost, any of these numbers are staggering and frankly frightening.

I have the DM 1936 Packard, and I enjoy the model. However, the issuing of the model is puzzling to me. Since I'm not in the diecast business, I don't know what methods DM employs to determine future model offerings. I have to assume that DM's product research has told them that the Packard would be a sales winner.

For the most part, and aside from the '36 Packard, it seems that DM's product offering closely mirrors the interest in the 1:1 collectible car market. '60s Muscle and '50s cars seem to dominate the auctions and get the highest dollars. If that's true, I think I'd continue on a similar path. Restomods are starting to garner huge dollars. Would they also be winners in 1:24? Would I as CEO risk the development dollars to find out?

As the DM CEO today, I'm certain I'd want to get as much use of the tool that we could. Consequently, it would most likely be cars that lend itself to different configurations, i.e., convertibles, hardtops, restomods, and perhaps station wagons. That would eliminate the Riviera, Toronado, Eldorado, and Lincoln Marks of the '60s. I think I'd watch what's happening at Mecum and Barret-Jackson and probably use those trends to help formulate my future product strategy.

Amen, brother!