You are right , because the designer on this type of project must suit a potential demand.
For example on the Trawler 72 the designer put a fly bridge with heavy equipment , we know all it is not to increase the quality of the boat at sea but only to fit a potential demand. Put 500 or 600 kgs at 4 m above the waterline ...sure don't give a better stability
A boat, as we wrote on our blog and as you wrote with another words, is always a sum of compromise.
Lengthened the hull by less than 2 feets and adjust with the repartitions of the weight it will be peanuts for the "change" in terms of "degradation"...
But some advantages , we don't know why they fit the aft like that but it is potentially dangerous with the tube and bracket who overhang...
AN are not "good" I always asked to them when I want the hull line... but for boat built for a potential market they must stay with the normal choice "flying bridge" or Portuguese bridge are two of theme for this type of "trawler" are the boats more safe ? with all this weight above water line ?
The structure of the Trawler 72 was checked by Veritas and nothing to say she look, for me , perfect. Not , by far, the most economical to built but perfect.
But for example I like have steps in the "walls" on each side...but AN don't design that ..can I do ? Sacrilegious if I fit them ?
The "bollard" feel not strong enough in my point of view also sacrilegious if I fit stronger one ? I don't like the actual system for anchor, I want the same than we design on our precedents boats ...sacrilegious if I change them.
Teak deck also was fitted for the market (not on all for example some Nordhaven don't have) we remove it
Years after years I think we finally got some experience, but still make mistake