A few questions actually. I just bought a domain with a PR1 and over 4000 backlinks. Not the content, just the domain. How can I guarantee I keep some of those statistics when I put my site up? Is Google going to come around and spank my bottom? Is this considered black hat SEO? Bad mojo?
You can't guarantee it - and many of those backlinks may not be helpful if they are pointing to a site topic that no longer exists (i.e. if it was a site about cars and had 4,000 car-related backlinks, but now you turned the site into a site about medicine). PR1 is worthless, that can be achieved in a month, I wouldnt worry about that. You won't be penalized, unless that domain name has been de-indexed already.
Id go to the web archive and grab as much of the old content as possible, then slowly over a few months and indexs begin to slowly change it. Its just a suggestion but it has worked for me
Yeah, the old owner of that site probably would post the same content elsewhere, and that would mean duplicate content. You wouldn't want that, you could get penalized.
Just use the content, they sold you the site, people copy content all the time, if they sue you take it off but they wont, besides your going to start changing it slowly
Google penalizes the site if they find out it's an exact copy of another. Read Google Matt Cutt's blog on duplicate content, several sites were banned for having duplicate content.
PR 1 isn't really such a loss. Those 4,000 back links must be low quality back links, PR wise. However, try looking at the anchor text, if the keywords you're targetting were actually used to link to the domain. If that's the case, it might actually be useful.
There are duplicate content that are considered safe, and there are duplicate content that aren't. Website mirroring, that is, copying the site exactly, is one of those that are unsafe. If your site is a complete duplicate of another site, it could mean an outright ban. www.wilsonweb.com/seo/dunn-duplicate-content.htm I read it also on Matt Cutt's blog, one site in particular that got banned because it was the exact copy of another site.
Well i don't know who wrote that article, but it's full of wrong info for example: The determination for a page to be in the supplemental index is pagerank, and has nothing to do with the content being duplicate or not. And again, there is no "duplicate content penalty". If there are two duplicate pages for a query, Google will choose to display the document it deems more authoritative.