Warning... I'm about to offend some posters.
Paraphrased:
I don't give two hoots if you think Frankston is great because it has sand castles or not great because people have mullets.
----
All of this subjective investment talk, as in choosing assets based on one's own perception of an area is insanity.
When investing you have to look at measurable units; of which, stigma is not one of them.
The problem with focusing on the "stigma", which is purely derived from social conditioning and emotional perception, of an area is that it often lingers long after the initial growth spurt of any gentrifying catchment. In layperson terms, the general populace will only think an area is desirable once it is widely accepted as desirable.
Time and time again lower socioeconomic areas or areas that have less infrastructure are developed and improved until they reach a tipping point. The risk with speculation is that capital improvements may not reach the pinnacle.
That tipping point, when reached, will usually see the area dramatically improve in value; which is also, generally speaking, before the wider market understands the new found desirability.
Speculative investment, the act of risky financial transactions in an attempt to profit from short or medium term fluctuations, has to be conducted pragmatically or it is simply gambling.
Thus, I say to all of you talking about "Franga's reputation" this: Remove your preconceptions about this area. Research facts. If you want to say there are socio-economic issues; then post crime rates, social service expenditure, unemployment and income/housing stress figures.
If you want to suggest that Frankston is "on the up", more so than other investment areas. Explain why!
It's not rocket science, but there is a science to it.