Welcome to the Q&A Forum

In your response to Chris, you said seeing it from keywords your competitors are using on their page. You also say you are aware of the tools he mentions. SEMRush has a competitors discovery within their campaigns that I find helpful. You will see the organic KWs they have already and you can put in your own. Once you place the competitors in the campaign and any additional keywords, you will see what they are ranking for and how it compares to you. You are not able to simply pull say 50 urls from a site and then 40 from another, as this tool is domain to domain. I would suggest with any of these tools that you have to use them a while to learn the nuances of each. I hope that helps a bit.

Hi Avi, Not a lot of material on this element so I can't really support my answer with public information. About 1.5 years ago we tested this question on some of our pages. Results were not conclusive as the difference in ranking was only so small. We tested this on popular pages (50k search a month) as well as long tail queries. We went all out with writing a crazy amount of content for those pages. I noticed that the expanded content was a detractor to our user's activity as our CR went down with it. Part of me thinks that hiding a significant portion of your textual content can lead to Google not taking this content into account. The other part wonder how google could effectively differentiate something that is hidden purely for aesthetic purpose and what is SEO hidden content. I suppose the format and volume of hidden content would dictate Google's perception of your content. Looking at the recent developments in Google approach towards content, I would say text heavy pages are progressively diminishing in value. If you could swap the text with a more engaging video, you are more likely to be in a better position in the near future.

Very good answer! If they get down that far it means they're still looking for confidence and need to be further convinced. Thanks for the inspiration.

Hi Avi, I have also used youtube videos on sites without using the scheme.org video markup and they have been showing up in serps as well. There's an interesting article, where this was tested by an SEO who also concluded that you don't need the scheme.org markup for Youtube videos: http://www.reelseo.com/embedded-youtube-indexed-google/ Considering Google owns Youtube, I guess it's no surprise! Adam.

The magazine has already given us the ok, like I said they're much more offline focused so it's more about what Google thinks. I think I agree about playing it safe with the canonical tag though. Thanks!

You'll have to do this in Google docs and not in Excel, but try this solution: http://www.seomoz.org/ugc/updated-tool-seomoz-api-data-for-google-docs