with QM, the "unobservable" stuff is just guaranteed to not be there, eg a particle detected at (x,t) is definitely not at (x',t); so you are observing it "not existing there" -- collapse just makes the measurement at (x',t) redundant

meanwhile with black holes you know there is something, but you can't measure

in both cases you don't get any information, but in QM it's only because you already know everything there is to know about the system

could it end up being fundamentally the same thing? I don't see why not, but for it to make sense you'd have to get a nobel prize for grand unification theory first

also, collapse is not real and can't hurt you anyway, see many-worlds