For starters, although my title says newbie, I've been designing websites and performing/practicing SEO for 3-4 years, so don't worry, my question isn't going to be as basic and newbish as the title may come across I've focused the majority of my SEO research and experimenting on Local SEO, which doesn't require as great of an emphasis on building backlinks (Not discounting it's importance, there's just other aspects I'd rather perfect), so I wanted to get an opinion from someone with more knowledge about my new domain since the search bar hasn't really helped. I've been putting together a business model and tracking analytics for a few case studies etc for a web design/local SEO company (with a slightly different approach from the competition) for about 6 months, and over the last week or so I've finally started bringing it all to fruition. Last week negotiations finally came to an end and I acquired the domain name for my new company. As I am a domain investor myself with a portfolio of just over 250 domains, I've always relied on dropcatching/expired auctions to find new domains with good PR, brandability, or EMDs. In doing so I usually perform a lot of research on the domains history and backlink profile before purchase, but with this new domain I already knew exactly what name I wanted for my brand going in, and spent a decent stack of cash picking it up based entirely on the quality of the generic keywords. While starting to build my site this week I researched the backlink profile, and it's much different than the newly expired domains I'm used to buying. Normally a few quick searches can reveal all the red flags of spam backlinks/fake pr domains, but I'm not sure how to interpret older sites with years between new content. The domain has been registered since 1997, but the previous owner has been holding onto it undeveloped since the early 2000's. I assumed most links would be broken and everything would have been deindexed, but since I've never dealt with a scenario like this I need some advice on the optimal white (or slightly grayish) hat technique to benefit from it's link profile, or at the very least avoid any negative consequences.. This is all done using OpenLinkProfiler. Here is a quick look at the "backlink freshness" of the domain View attachment 52490 Then sorting from largest to smallest link influence score, there are a few random backlinks from PR 3-5s with DA of 50+ â€‹ View attachment 52491 and then you get to the red...over 150 links to a blogs archives starting in 2003. View attachment 52492 None of them for the most part link to the root domain, but primarily to an old broken deep-link that has anchor text 100% irrelevant to my website. View attachment 52493 Then the last handful of links are actually pretty interesting, as they are typos meant to link back to mydomain.com.au. The .com.au is also a web design company, and the typos are in the footer of their clients sites. The anchor text is simply thedomain.com.au for each of the links though, so I'm not sure if that has any SEO impact. View attachment 52494 View attachment 52495 I'm personally a fan of only 1 well-placed contextual link rather than stuffing backlinks in the footer on every page of client sites for long-term SEO, and hope G doesn't penalize me in any way for it now or in the future.. But with a general idea of the situation, how would you approach it if were your site? Do you think these links will positively impact rankings even if they don't have any related content or geographical relation, and if so what would be the best practices for maximizing the link juice..or am I just wasting my time analyzing something that won't have any SEO impact at all? Or could these borderline spammy links possibly hurt my rank while there is minimal content or indexed pages on the site? If anyone could shed some light or point me to some solid articles on the subject, it would be greatly appreciated..Of all my SEO research and projects this is one of the most arbitrary concepts that I just don't seem to grasp or find much consensus over..