Does collapsing content impact Google SEO signals?

[EGOL]

About two years ago I had collapsed content on some important pages.  Their longtail traffic went into a steady slide, but the head traffic held.   I attribute this to a sign that the collapsed content was discounted, removing it from, or lowering its ability to count in the rankings for long tail queries.

I expanded the page, making all content visible.  A few months later, longtail traffic started to slowly rise.  It took many months to climb back to previous levels.

After this, every word of my content is now in the open.

[Yoav-Blustein]

Recently i a had related issue with a top ranking website for very competitive queries.
Unfortunately the product department made some changes to the content (UI only) without consulting SEO department. The only worth to mention change they made was to move the first two paragraphs into a collapsible DIV showing only the first 3 lines + a "read more" button. The text in collapsible div was crawlable and visible to SE's. (also it's worth to mention that these paragrap
But the site lost its major keywords positions 2-3 days later.

Of-course we reverted the changes back but still two months later, the keywords are very slowly moving back to their "original" positions.

For years i believed in what Google stated, that you can use collapsible content if you are not trying to inject keywords or trying to inflate the amount of content etc. Not anymore.

I believe that placing the content under a collapsible div element, we are actually signaling google that this piece of content is not that important (that's why it is hidden, right? Otherwise it should be in plain sight). So why we should expect from google to take this content as a major part of our contents ranking factor weight.

[RosemaryB]

Yes that is a very legitimate concern of mine.  We have invested significant resources into custom long form content for our clients and we are very concerned this all for nothing...or possibly worse (discounting content).

[RosemaryB]

How collapsed was your content?  Did you hide the entire block?  Only show a few sentences?  I'm trying to find a research article about this.  This is a MAJOR issue to consider for our SEO campaigns.

[EGOL]

It was similar to a Q&A.  There was a single sentence question and a paragraph of hidden answer.  This page had a LOT of questions and a tremendous amount of keywords in the hidden content.  Thousands of words.

The long tail traffic tanked.  Then, when we opened the content again the traffic took months to start coming back.  The main keywords held in the SERPs.  The longtail accounted for the 80% loss.

[RosemaryB]

We are applying 500 to 800+ word custom content blocks for our client landing pages (local landing pages) that shows a preview of the first paragraph and a "read more" expansion link.  We know that most website visitors only care about the location info of these particular landing pages.  We also know that our client UX teams would certainly not approve an entire visible content block on these pages.
Are there any case studies about this issue?  I'm trying to find a bona fide research project to help back up our argument.

[EGOL]

Are there any case studies about this issue?

Just the one that I published above.  The conclusion is... be prepared to sacrifice 80% of your traffic if you hide your valuable content behind a preview.

I would be asking the UX people to furnish studies that hiding content produces better sales.

We have lots of people raving about the abundance of content on our site, the detailed product descriptions, how much help we give them to decide what to purchase.  All of this content is why we dominate the SERPs in our niche and that, in many people's eyes, is a sign of credibility.  Lots of people say... "we bought from you because your website is so helpful".   However, if we didn't have all of this content in the open these same people would have never even found us.

Nobody has to read this stuff.  I would rather land on a website and see my options than land on a website and assume that they was no information because I didn't notice that the links to open it were in faded microfont because the UX guys wanted things to be tidy.    I believe that it is a bigger sin to have fantastic content behind a clickthorugh than it is to put valuable information in the open and allow people to have the opportunity to read it.

Putting our content out in the open is what makes our reputation.

I sure am glad that I am the boss here.  I can make the decisions and be paid on the basis of my performance.  

[RosemaryB]

Yep I completely agree with your response.  Unfortunately I'm in a position where I manage major enterprise accounts with multiple stakeholders (including some people are not educated in SEO).  Every major change we propose needs to be documented, cited and reviewed.  When making an argument for content expansion I would need to use thorough research example (Moz study, documentation on search engine land, etc).

Anyway thank for taking the time to share your feedback and advice on this thread.  Although this is not the answer I wanted to hear (i.e. Google doesn't respect collapsed content)...however it's very likely accurate.  This is a serious SEO issue that needs to be addressed.

[EGOL]

If I see a study, I'll post a link here.

[Yoav-Blustein]

well.. yup. I know many SEOs that do think that the collapsable are is just not important enough for google to consider it

good luck

[RosemaryB]

Thanks EGOL.  Still looking for additional evidence about this.