I grew up in LA, and have lived behind the Orange Curtain, and that's my point. The area is way too large in geographic area and demographics for me to believe the folks there are buying fixies in ways that exceed the mean.
It's far easier for me to wonder if they mixed up the data.
Almost by definition, a very large place with a very large population should have regressed to the mean, not far exceed it.
I live in San Clemente (a city of ~60,000 in Orange County) now, and was born in Pasadena. I was starting to get annoyed at OC being treated as one "city" here too, then I realized I should probably just be happy that a distinction between LA and OC was made at all. All too often, "LA" is used to mean everything south of Santa Barbara and north of Oceanside.
Very interesting. I figured you were crazy, luckily the wiki is still up, and lo! You're right!
So thank you for the education, although I actually don't think that changes my point terribly much.
Orange County with 3,000,000 people over 1000 sq. miles dwarfs most of the other entities, including Manhattan.
I would think that without an explanation of why they are an outlier, a population this size, this diverse, over a diverse geography (flatland, hills, mountains) would regress towards the mean. If they are dramatically outside the mean (and here they are far and away in the lead), there needs to be an explanation.
(I liked two explanations: one is that they are counting surfer's beach cruisers would could be a very real effect down in OC which has great surfing and lots of trends toward surfing style. And the other that suggests these bikes or similar may be very popular among latino populations for some unknown reason.)
Orange, CA is a city, with a population of 150,000
Why is Orange County listed in the chart when all other entrants seem to be cities (or boroughs).