"NickMaronese" (NickMaronese)
02/03/2016 at 14:44 • Filed to: None | 5 | 17 |
I’m not exactly sure of the origins of the phrase “data journalism,” but I can tell you its use, and the popularity of data journalism itself, has skyrocketed in the past five years.
Data journalism essentially involves taking large amounts of statistical information about a population or a certain kind of behaviour, sifting through and analyzing it and then correlating it to other data, to figure out certain interesting trends, hopefully to draw out a causal connection.
It’s become a lot easier over the past decade thanks to the growing amount of information governments and other organizations have started collecting about people; the increasingly public availability of that information to journalists; and innovations in software that make it easier to process large amounts of data.
—I don’t do data journalism.
The closest I get is reviewing and breaking down classic car auctions results by brand or segment or something like that, which is to say, I don’t get very close at all.
I’ve never downloaded any software to process data faster or anything. When it came time to draft my annual gallery of !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! this year, for example, all I did was CTRL-F by dollar amount to find the $1,xxx cars, then $2,xxx, working my way up to the $10,000 mark.
!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!
(Barrett-Jackson, unlike many other auction houses, doesn’t let you sort their results by final sale price. Thank God they use commas to separate thousands of dollars from hundreds, or else the above technique wouldn’t work and I’d have to browse all 1,500 lots’ prices manually.)
It takes a bit of time, but it does the job, and should suit me fine. Unless I start working for a client that requires me to do some real number-crunching, like Hagerty classic car insurers and appraisers or something. (Which is possible—just submitted my first piece to them a few weeks ago.)
But if – when? – I do end up doing some sort of real data journalism with cars or vintage autos or whatever, don’t worry, I’ll let you guys know what it’s like.
Trends amongst the bottom 20 cars sold at Barrett-Jackson? Well, compared to last year, there’re a lot fewer genuinely interesting finds, at least from my point of view. No
!!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!!
this time around.
The bulk of the lots under $10,000 are, like last year, mostly 1980s through 2000s Mercedes-Benz, with a handful of driver-quality classics thrown in. There are fewer trucks and more European sports car present, none of which can be explained by looking at general trends in the hobby. (Maybe I need a larger sample size.)
Of course, on the other end, there were !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! – especially Pontiac Firebirds – but this was mostly the year people started talking about the hobby slowing down and stabilizing—it was in fact !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! in terms of Barrett-Jackson sales overall since 2010.
That may be due to rival auctions stealing sales, but it’ll be interesting to see how the rest of the market fares this year. More importantly, it will be neat to see how things shake out at next year’s Barrett-Jackson event—especially amongst the bottom 20.
JR1
> NickMaronese
02/03/2016 at 14:59 | 1 |
Even with a 20% buyers premium some of these cars are a real steal
BrianGriffin thinks “reliable” is just a state of mind
> NickMaronese
02/03/2016 at 15:04 | 1 |
I kinda want that Stealth or 928...
RamblinRover Luxury-Yacht
> NickMaronese
02/03/2016 at 15:09 | 1 |
Somebody let go of a Power Wagon for less than $5k? The fuck?
NickMaronese
> JR1
02/03/2016 at 15:15 | 1 |
These prices are already
with
the buyer’s commission!
RamblinRover Luxury-Yacht
> NickMaronese
02/03/2016 at 15:15 | 1 |
Incidentally, the ‘63 Ranchero you cross-posted on the entry for the ‘50s model has some very fucky things going on. The battery has been moved from one side of the engine bay to the other for no reason, the fuel cap has been swapped for an early model, the badging has been swapped for “Falcon” badging even though the Ranchero badging is available new repro for cheap, the grill and signals are from a ‘62, etc. Add the odd wheel choice and the things he listed (like the “I MADE MY OWN AIR CLEANER”) and it’s just... weird.
NickMaronese
> BrianGriffin thinks “reliable” is just a state of mind
02/03/2016 at 15:16 | 0 |
I don’t understand why, but dat Stealth looks right to me...
lone_liberal
> NickMaronese
02/03/2016 at 15:36 | 1 |
I’d love to hear the rationale for the huge prices for late 2nd gen Trans Ams. I wouldn’t mind having one as a basis for a project car, but a bone stock one? That befuddles me. A ‘73 Super Duty? Sure, but a ‘77 with a 200hp engine? Madness.
deekster_caddy
> NickMaronese
02/03/2016 at 15:43 | 1 |
I have a friend who worked on this car before it’s resto was finished:
http://www.barrett-jackson.com/Events/Event/D…
He was pretty stoked to hear it went for that much!
functionoverfashion
> NickMaronese
02/03/2016 at 15:45 | 1 |
How is it that the “patina’d” Chevy went for MORE than that ‘71 F100?
shop-teacher
> NickMaronese
02/03/2016 at 15:53 | 1 |
It’s the taillights.
V8Demon - Prefers Autos for drag racing. Fite me!
> NickMaronese
02/03/2016 at 15:58 | 2 |
$5,500?!!!!
Dammit!!!!
If only EssExTee could be so grossly incandescent
> NickMaronese
02/03/2016 at 16:05 | 1 |
The first car should say Classi with an I and a little dick hangin off the C that bends around and fucks the L out of the A S S on the door
PS9
> NickMaronese
02/03/2016 at 16:13 | 0 |
Wow, that caddy has hit peak Rolland.
NickMaronese
> deekster_caddy
02/03/2016 at 16:15 | 0 |
Niiiice.
That thing looks boss. Gotta dig that Saturn Yellow.
Takuro Spirit
> NickMaronese
02/03/2016 at 16:17 | 1 |
$4620????????????
$4950???????????????????????????
Someone remind me why I paid that much for my 3?????????
JR1
> NickMaronese
02/03/2016 at 16:46 | 1 |
My mind is blown
banjo cat ghost of oppo past
> V8Demon - Prefers Autos for drag racing. Fite me!
02/04/2016 at 11:24 | 0 |
Boosh!