If the economy falls off a cliff, do you want to be finding tenants for one beautiful house on the beach, or two nondescript mediocre ones five minutes into the neighborhoods?
I knew of some out of state investors from California who wanted to purchase commercial property in Las Vegas when the market was "hot" before the '08 crash. Of course everything was expensive, so they decided that a great way to get a bargain was to buy buildings that didn't face a major thoroughfare. It was a great idea at the time, and of course all of the properties were full, so everything started off great.
Of course, when the market collapsed, everyone found out that they had grossly overpaid. When rents were forced down the owners with the good locations ended up with all of the surviving tenants - and the owners of the poor locations were in hot water.
I think it is a common mistake in judgement to think that "luxury" items are the first to go in an economic squeeze. Did a lot of luxury brands, stores, services and restaurants get wiped out by Covid - or was it the stuff in the middle that everyone gave up? And, who came back faster after the smoke cleared?
What's the golden rule for real estate? Location, location, location. It seems less applicable when every address seems to be doing well - but sure enough the time will come back around to prove the point true again.
Good luck out there!