twangster

The two are intertwined.  More importantly the safety aspect creates an operating environment they are constrained by and creates an environment that isn't found on land so comparisons to land based businesses don't work.
 
Royal is a business not a charity.  It's easy to say they could provide <insert thing I care about> and not feel a thing.  McDonalds could provide free soda and not feel a thing.  Sports stadiums could provide free water bottles and not feel a thing, they cost pennies!!!  Banks could not charge maintenance fees and not feel a thing.  And so on, and so.  
Why should they?  Why should any business give up revenue? 
The thing is businesses won't accept less income.  Shareholders won't accept lower returns.  They would need to cover that loss of income somehow.  Something else goes up in price to cover that loss of income.  
Any time you waive a charge or subsidize it someone pays for it.  
I cruise solo often so my favorite <insert thing here> would be the single supplement.  I could rant and write long justifications why solo cruisers shouldn't have to pay single supplements but the truth is solo cruisers represent a loss of revenue potential and so as a business they charge solo cruisers more and there are times of the year they charge them even more because they lose more revenue on solo cruisers during peak times.     
Other popular < insert thing here >:
< free Voom for everyone >
< free drinks for everyone >
< free photos for everyone >
< free specialty dining for everyone >
< lower cruise fares right now > 
< lower suite fares > 
There are many things they could afford to do and not go bankrupt.  Not going bankrupt isn't the primary goal of any business.  Maximizing revenue should always be.  
Do you not own any investments or retirement accounts?  Are you okay with your investments not growing as much?  You good with retiring with less savings?  All so businesses can provide more free things?

Feel bad?  Nope.
The thing of it is Royal isn't overcharging.  
No one is required to go on a cruise vacation.  Sail with a cruise line here in America who offers your infants free fare.  In a free and open market consumers can make those choices and business can set policies to achieve their business goals.  It's a wonderful thing.    

The two are intertwined.  More importantly the safety aspect creates an operating environment they are constrained by and creates an environment that isn't found on land so comparisons to land based businesses don't work.
 
Royal is a business not a charity.  It's easy to say they could provide <insert thing I care about> and not feel a thing.  McDonalds could provide free soda and not feel a thing.  Sports stadiums could provide free water bottles and not feel a thing, they cost pennies!!!  Banks could not charge maintenance fees and not feel a thing.  And so on, and so.  
Why should they?  Why should any business give up revenue? 
The thing is businesses won't accept less income.  Shareholders won't accept lower returns.  They would need to cover that loss of income somehow.  Something else goes up in price to cover that loss of income.  
Any time you waive a charge or subsidize it someone pays for it.  
I cruise solo often so my favorite <insert thing here> would be the single supplement.  I could rant and write long justifications why solo cruisers shouldn't have to pay single supplements but the truth is solo cruisers represent a loss of revenue potential and so as a business they charge solo cruisers more and there are times of the year they charge them even more because they lose more revenue on solo cruisers during peak times.     
Other popular < insert thing here >:
< free Voom for everyone >
< free drinks for everyone >
< free photos for everyone >
< free specialty dining for everyone >
< lower cruise fares right now > 
< lower suite fares > 
There are many things they could afford to do and not go bankrupt.  Not going bankrupt isn't the primary goal of any business.  Maximizing revenue should always be.  
Do you not own any investments or retirement accounts?  Are you okay with your investments not growing as much?  You good with retiring with less savings?  All so businesses can provide more free things?

I get it.  You don't want to hear what I'm saying.  
You just want what you want.  
Enjoy your cruise.

If we’re going to be honest here, I think many people (me included) just hate the idea that there’s some place on the ship (whether it’s a “nice” venue or not) that they canNOT go.  The D/CL/SL is one of those places for some people.  I don’t often frequent the DL/CL but I COULD go if I wanted to.  When you no longer have that option, it’s disappointing.

You want for free what is important to you.  The world doesn't work that way.

Every soul on board must have a seat in a lifeboat.  This applies even to an infant that is 6 months old even though an infant at that age would not use their own seat in a lifeboat.  SOLAS regulations don't recognize or reflect a difference from an infant to an adult, a soul is a soul that requires a seat in a lifeboat.
If there was one slot left for anyone to book a cruise before that cruise was sold out, an infant booked on a cruise prevents an adult from booking that available slot.  Given the price models for the industry an infant is no different from an adult right down to the capacity of a muster zone that groups of cabins are assigned to with all the guests in those cabins having a seat in the lifeboats assigned to that muster station.
It's common for new parents to hope for a break in pricing for an infant but the price models for everyone who books a cruise are built so many common costs are covered or shared by the masses of adults booking that cruise.  "But it's just one baby" until there are 30 or 40 or 100 babies on a ship that carries several thousands of passengers.  At that point for a cruise line to offer cheaper rates to infants someone else has to pay more and that would be all the other adults.  That's fine from a socialist perspective but not all other adults want to cover the cost of someone else's infant.  
Fortunately for parents Royal does offer Kids Sail Free promotions but as many families discover those rates require more expensive cabins that can accommodate more than two guests which gets back to the seats in a lifeboat concept.  The vast majority of cabins on a ship are designed for two guests and that is part of the safety equation so that every guest has a seat in a lifeboat.  Hotels on land don't have lifeboats with finite seating capacity so cruise ships are not at all like hotels in this regard which can be a hard concept for some families to wrap their heads around. 
"It's just a tiny infant" except it isn't from a safety on a ship perspective.   If safety regulations were to be relaxed then there would be some less honest company that would attempt to circumvent safety regulations by over-stuffing a ferry or some other type of passenger vessel to leverage such a loophole.  For this reason safety regulations are not flexible even though a reputable company like Royal may not choose to find a way around the regulations should the regulations be less strict than they are. 
These regulations are international and they have evolved over the decades generally resulting from loss of life and previous disasters.    
And so it's complicated, more than apparent at first glance.

Every soul on board must have a seat in a lifeboat.  This applies even to an infant that is 6 months old even though an infant at that age would not use their own seat in a lifeboat.  SOLAS regulations don't recognize or reflect a difference from an infant to an adult, a soul is a soul that requires a seat in a lifeboat.
If there was one slot left for anyone to book a cruise before that cruise was sold out, an infant booked on a cruise prevents an adult from booking that available slot.  Given the price models for the industry an infant is no different from an adult right down to the capacity of a muster zone that groups of cabins are assigned to with all the guests in those cabins having a seat in the lifeboats assigned to that muster station.
It's common for new parents to hope for a break in pricing for an infant but the price models for everyone who books a cruise are built so many common costs are covered or shared by the masses of adults booking that cruise.  "But it's just one baby" until there are 30 or 40 or 100 babies on a ship that carries several thousands of passengers.  At that point for a cruise line to offer cheaper rates to infants someone else has to pay more and that would be all the other adults.  That's fine from a socialist perspective but not all other adults want to cover the cost of someone else's infant.  
Fortunately for parents Royal does offer Kids Sail Free promotions but as many families discover those rates require more expensive cabins that can accommodate more than two guests which gets back to the seats in a lifeboat concept.  The vast majority of cabins on a ship are designed for two guests and that is part of the safety equation so that every guest has a seat in a lifeboat.  Hotels on land don't have lifeboats with finite seating capacity so cruise ships are not at all like hotels in this regard which can be a hard concept for some families to wrap their heads around. 
"It's just a tiny infant" except it isn't from a safety on a ship perspective.   If safety regulations were to be relaxed then there would be some less honest company that would attempt to circumvent safety regulations by over-stuffing a ferry or some other type of passenger vessel to leverage such a loophole.  For this reason safety regulations are not flexible even though a reputable company like Royal may not choose to find a way around the regulations should the regulations be less strict than they are. 
These regulations are international and they have evolved over the decades generally resulting from loss of life and previous disasters.    
And so it's complicated, more than apparent at first glance.

Every soul on board must have a seat in a lifeboat.  This applies even to an infant that is 6 months old even though an infant at that age would not use their own seat in a lifeboat.  SOLAS regulations don't recognize or reflect a difference from an infant to an adult, a soul is a soul that requires a seat in a lifeboat.
If there was one slot left for anyone to book a cruise before that cruise was sold out, an infant booked on a cruise prevents an adult from booking that available slot.  Given the price models for the industry an infant is no different from an adult right down to the capacity of a muster zone that groups of cabins are assigned to with all the guests in those cabins having a seat in the lifeboats assigned to that muster station.
It's common for new parents to hope for a break in pricing for an infant but the price models for everyone who books a cruise are built so many common costs are covered or shared by the masses of adults booking that cruise.  "But it's just one baby" until there are 30 or 40 or 100 babies on a ship that carries several thousands of passengers.  At that point for a cruise line to offer cheaper rates to infants someone else has to pay more and that would be all the other adults.  That's fine from a socialist perspective but not all other adults want to cover the cost of someone else's infant.  
Fortunately for parents Royal does offer Kids Sail Free promotions but as many families discover those rates require more expensive cabins that can accommodate more than two guests which gets back to the seats in a lifeboat concept.  The vast majority of cabins on a ship are designed for two guests and that is part of the safety equation so that every guest has a seat in a lifeboat.  Hotels on land don't have lifeboats with finite seating capacity so cruise ships are not at all like hotels in this regard which can be a hard concept for some families to wrap their heads around. 
"It's just a tiny infant" except it isn't from a safety on a ship perspective.   If safety regulations were to be relaxed then there would be some less honest company that would attempt to circumvent safety regulations by over-stuffing a ferry or some other type of passenger vessel to leverage such a loophole.  For this reason safety regulations are not flexible even though a reputable company like Royal may not choose to find a way around the regulations should the regulations be less strict than they are. 
These regulations are international and they have evolved over the decades generally resulting from loss of life and previous disasters.    
And so it's complicated, more than apparent at first glance.

Every soul on board must have a seat in a lifeboat.  This applies even to an infant that is 6 months old even though an infant at that age would not use their own seat in a lifeboat.  SOLAS regulations don't recognize or reflect a difference from an infant to an adult, a soul is a soul that requires a seat in a lifeboat.
If there was one slot left for anyone to book a cruise before that cruise was sold out, an infant booked on a cruise prevents an adult from booking that available slot.  Given the price models for the industry an infant is no different from an adult right down to the capacity of a muster zone that groups of cabins are assigned to with all the guests in those cabins having a seat in the lifeboats assigned to that muster station.
It's common for new parents to hope for a break in pricing for an infant but the price models for everyone who books a cruise are built so many common costs are covered or shared by the masses of adults booking that cruise.  "But it's just one baby" until there are 30 or 40 or 100 babies on a ship that carries several thousands of passengers.  At that point for a cruise line to offer cheaper rates to infants someone else has to pay more and that would be all the other adults.  That's fine from a socialist perspective but not all other adults want to cover the cost of someone else's infant.  
Fortunately for parents Royal does offer Kids Sail Free promotions but as many families discover those rates require more expensive cabins that can accommodate more than two guests which gets back to the seats in a lifeboat concept.  The vast majority of cabins on a ship are designed for two guests and that is part of the safety equation so that every guest has a seat in a lifeboat.  Hotels on land don't have lifeboats with finite seating capacity so cruise ships are not at all like hotels in this regard which can be a hard concept for some families to wrap their heads around. 
"It's just a tiny infant" except it isn't from a safety on a ship perspective.   If safety regulations were to be relaxed then there would be some less honest company that would attempt to circumvent safety regulations by over-stuffing a ferry or some other type of passenger vessel to leverage such a loophole.  For this reason safety regulations are not flexible even though a reputable company like Royal may not choose to find a way around the regulations should the regulations be less strict than they are. 
These regulations are international and they have evolved over the decades generally resulting from loss of life and previous disasters.    
And so it's complicated, more than apparent at first glance.

Every soul on board must have a seat in a lifeboat.  This applies even to an infant that is 6 months old even though an infant at that age would not use their own seat in a lifeboat.  SOLAS regulations don't recognize or reflect a difference from an infant to an adult, a soul is a soul that requires a seat in a lifeboat.
If there was one slot left for anyone to book a cruise before that cruise was sold out, an infant booked on a cruise prevents an adult from booking that available slot.  Given the price models for the industry an infant is no different from an adult right down to the capacity of a muster zone that groups of cabins are assigned to with all the guests in those cabins having a seat in the lifeboats assigned to that muster station.
It's common for new parents to hope for a break in pricing for an infant but the price models for everyone who books a cruise are built so many common costs are covered or shared by the masses of adults booking that cruise.  "But it's just one baby" until there are 30 or 40 or 100 babies on a ship that carries several thousands of passengers.  At that point for a cruise line to offer cheaper rates to infants someone else has to pay more and that would be all the other adults.  That's fine from a socialist perspective but not all other adults want to cover the cost of someone else's infant.  
Fortunately for parents Royal does offer Kids Sail Free promotions but as many families discover those rates require more expensive cabins that can accommodate more than two guests which gets back to the seats in a lifeboat concept.  The vast majority of cabins on a ship are designed for two guests and that is part of the safety equation so that every guest has a seat in a lifeboat.  Hotels on land don't have lifeboats with finite seating capacity so cruise ships are not at all like hotels in this regard which can be a hard concept for some families to wrap their heads around. 
"It's just a tiny infant" except it isn't from a safety on a ship perspective.   If safety regulations were to be relaxed then there would be some less honest company that would attempt to circumvent safety regulations by over-stuffing a ferry or some other type of passenger vessel to leverage such a loophole.  For this reason safety regulations are not flexible even though a reputable company like Royal may not choose to find a way around the regulations should the regulations be less strict than they are. 
These regulations are international and they have evolved over the decades generally resulting from loss of life and previous disasters.    
And so it's complicated, more than apparent at first glance.

Every soul on board must have a seat in a lifeboat.  This applies even to an infant that is 6 months old even though an infant at that age would not use their own seat in a lifeboat.  SOLAS regulations don't recognize or reflect a difference from an infant to an adult, a soul is a soul that requires a seat in a lifeboat.
If there was one slot left for anyone to book a cruise before that cruise was sold out, an infant booked on a cruise prevents an adult from booking that available slot.  Given the price models for the industry an infant is no different from an adult right down to the capacity of a muster zone that groups of cabins are assigned to with all the guests in those cabins having a seat in the lifeboats assigned to that muster station.
It's common for new parents to hope for a break in pricing for an infant but the price models for everyone who books a cruise are built so many common costs are covered or shared by the masses of adults booking that cruise.  "But it's just one baby" until there are 30 or 40 or 100 babies on a ship that carries several thousands of passengers.  At that point for a cruise line to offer cheaper rates to infants someone else has to pay more and that would be all the other adults.  That's fine from a socialist perspective but not all other adults want to cover the cost of someone else's infant.  
Fortunately for parents Royal does offer Kids Sail Free promotions but as many families discover those rates require more expensive cabins that can accommodate more than two guests which gets back to the seats in a lifeboat concept.  The vast majority of cabins on a ship are designed for two guests and that is part of the safety equation so that every guest has a seat in a lifeboat.  Hotels on land don't have lifeboats with finite seating capacity so cruise ships are not at all like hotels in this regard which can be a hard concept for some families to wrap their heads around. 
"It's just a tiny infant" except it isn't from a safety on a ship perspective.   If safety regulations were to be relaxed then there would be some less honest company that would attempt to circumvent safety regulations by over-stuffing a ferry or some other type of passenger vessel to leverage such a loophole.  For this reason safety regulations are not flexible even though a reputable company like Royal may not choose to find a way around the regulations should the regulations be less strict than they are. 
These regulations are international and they have evolved over the decades generally resulting from loss of life and previous disasters.    
And so it's complicated, more than apparent at first glance.

Every soul on board must have a seat in a lifeboat.  This applies even to an infant that is 6 months old even though an infant at that age would not use their own seat in a lifeboat.  SOLAS regulations don't recognize or reflect a difference from an infant to an adult, a soul is a soul that requires a seat in a lifeboat.
If there was one slot left for anyone to book a cruise before that cruise was sold out, an infant booked on a cruise prevents an adult from booking that available slot.  Given the price models for the industry an infant is no different from an adult right down to the capacity of a muster zone that groups of cabins are assigned to with all the guests in those cabins having a seat in the lifeboats assigned to that muster station.
It's common for new parents to hope for a break in pricing for an infant but the price models for everyone who books a cruise are built so many common costs are covered or shared by the masses of adults booking that cruise.  "But it's just one baby" until there are 30 or 40 or 100 babies on a ship that carries several thousands of passengers.  At that point for a cruise line to offer cheaper rates to infants someone else has to pay more and that would be all the other adults.  That's fine from a socialist perspective but not all other adults want to cover the cost of someone else's infant.  
Fortunately for parents Royal does offer Kids Sail Free promotions but as many families discover those rates require more expensive cabins that can accommodate more than two guests which gets back to the seats in a lifeboat concept.  The vast majority of cabins on a ship are designed for two guests and that is part of the safety equation so that every guest has a seat in a lifeboat.  Hotels on land don't have lifeboats with finite seating capacity so cruise ships are not at all like hotels in this regard which can be a hard concept for some families to wrap their heads around. 
"It's just a tiny infant" except it isn't from a safety on a ship perspective.   If safety regulations were to be relaxed then there would be some less honest company that would attempt to circumvent safety regulations by over-stuffing a ferry or some other type of passenger vessel to leverage such a loophole.  For this reason safety regulations are not flexible even though a reputable company like Royal may not choose to find a way around the regulations should the regulations be less strict than they are. 
These regulations are international and they have evolved over the decades generally resulting from loss of life and previous disasters.    
And so it's complicated, more than apparent at first glance.

Every soul on board must have a seat in a lifeboat.  This applies even to an infant that is 6 months old even though an infant at that age would not use their own seat in a lifeboat.  SOLAS regulations don't recognize or reflect a difference from an infant to an adult, a soul is a soul that requires a seat in a lifeboat.
If there was one slot left for anyone to book a cruise before that cruise was sold out, an infant booked on a cruise prevents an adult from booking that available slot.  Given the price models for the industry an infant is no different from an adult right down to the capacity of a muster zone that groups of cabins are assigned to with all the guests in those cabins having a seat in the lifeboats assigned to that muster station.
It's common for new parents to hope for a break in pricing for an infant but the price models for everyone who books a cruise are built so many common costs are covered or shared by the masses of adults booking that cruise.  "But it's just one baby" until there are 30 or 40 or 100 babies on a ship that carries several thousands of passengers.  At that point for a cruise line to offer cheaper rates to infants someone else has to pay more and that would be all the other adults.  That's fine from a socialist perspective but not all other adults want to cover the cost of someone else's infant.  
Fortunately for parents Royal does offer Kids Sail Free promotions but as many families discover those rates require more expensive cabins that can accommodate more than two guests which gets back to the seats in a lifeboat concept.  The vast majority of cabins on a ship are designed for two guests and that is part of the safety equation so that every guest has a seat in a lifeboat.  Hotels on land don't have lifeboats with finite seating capacity so cruise ships are not at all like hotels in this regard which can be a hard concept for some families to wrap their heads around. 
"It's just a tiny infant" except it isn't from a safety on a ship perspective.   If safety regulations were to be relaxed then there would be some less honest company that would attempt to circumvent safety regulations by over-stuffing a ferry or some other type of passenger vessel to leverage such a loophole.  For this reason safety regulations are not flexible even though a reputable company like Royal may not choose to find a way around the regulations should the regulations be less strict than they are. 
These regulations are international and they have evolved over the decades generally resulting from loss of life and previous disasters.    
And so it's complicated, more than apparent at first glance.

Every soul on board must have a seat in a lifeboat.  This applies even to an infant that is 6 months old even though an infant at that age would not use their own seat in a lifeboat.  SOLAS regulations don't recognize or reflect a difference from an infant to an adult, a soul is a soul that requires a seat in a lifeboat.
If there was one slot left for anyone to book a cruise before that cruise was sold out, an infant booked on a cruise prevents an adult from booking that available slot.  Given the price models for the industry an infant is no different from an adult right down to the capacity of a muster zone that groups of cabins are assigned to with all the guests in those cabins having a seat in the lifeboats assigned to that muster station.
It's common for new parents to hope for a break in pricing for an infant but the price models for everyone who books a cruise are built so many common costs are covered or shared by the masses of adults booking that cruise.  "But it's just one baby" until there are 30 or 40 or 100 babies on a ship that carries several thousands of passengers.  At that point for a cruise line to offer cheaper rates to infants someone else has to pay more and that would be all the other adults.  That's fine from a socialist perspective but not all other adults want to cover the cost of someone else's infant.  
Fortunately for parents Royal does offer Kids Sail Free promotions but as many families discover those rates require more expensive cabins that can accommodate more than two guests which gets back to the seats in a lifeboat concept.  The vast majority of cabins on a ship are designed for two guests and that is part of the safety equation so that every guest has a seat in a lifeboat.  Hotels on land don't have lifeboats with finite seating capacity so cruise ships are not at all like hotels in this regard which can be a hard concept for some families to wrap their heads around. 
"It's just a tiny infant" except it isn't from a safety on a ship perspective.   If safety regulations were to be relaxed then there would be some less honest company that would attempt to circumvent safety regulations by over-stuffing a ferry or some other type of passenger vessel to leverage such a loophole.  For this reason safety regulations are not flexible even though a reputable company like Royal may not choose to find a way around the regulations should the regulations be less strict than they are. 
These regulations are international and they have evolved over the decades generally resulting from loss of life and previous disasters.    
And so it's complicated, more than apparent at first glance.

Every soul on board must have a seat in a lifeboat.  This applies even to an infant that is 6 months old even though an infant at that age would not use their own seat in a lifeboat.  SOLAS regulations don't recognize or reflect a difference from an infant to an adult, a soul is a soul that requires a seat in a lifeboat.
If there was one slot left for anyone to book a cruise before that cruise was sold out, an infant booked on a cruise prevents an adult from booking that available slot.  Given the price models for the industry an infant is no different from an adult right down to the capacity of a muster zone that groups of cabins are assigned to with all the guests in those cabins having a seat in the lifeboats assigned to that muster station.
It's common for new parents to hope for a break in pricing for an infant but the price models for everyone who books a cruise are built so many common costs are covered or shared by the masses of adults booking that cruise.  "But it's just one baby" until there are 30 or 40 or 100 babies on a ship that carries several thousands of passengers.  At that point for a cruise line to offer cheaper rates to infants someone else has to pay more and that would be all the other adults.  That's fine from a socialist perspective but not all other adults want to cover the cost of someone else's infant.  
Fortunately for parents Royal does offer Kids Sail Free promotions but as many families discover those rates require more expensive cabins that can accommodate more than two guests which gets back to the seats in a lifeboat concept.  The vast majority of cabins on a ship are designed for two guests and that is part of the safety equation so that every guest has a seat in a lifeboat.  Hotels on land don't have lifeboats with finite seating capacity so cruise ships are not at all like hotels in this regard which can be a hard concept for some families to wrap their heads around. 
"It's just a tiny infant" except it isn't from a safety on a ship perspective.   If safety regulations were to be relaxed then there would be some less honest company that would attempt to circumvent safety regulations by over-stuffing a ferry or some other type of passenger vessel to leverage such a loophole.  For this reason safety regulations are not flexible even though a reputable company like Royal may not choose to find a way around the regulations should the regulations be less strict than they are. 
These regulations are international and they have evolved over the decades generally resulting from loss of life and previous disasters.    
And so it's complicated, more than apparent at first glance.

Every soul on board must have a seat in a lifeboat.  This applies even to an infant that is 6 months old even though an infant at that age would not use their own seat in a lifeboat.  SOLAS regulations don't recognize or reflect a difference from an infant to an adult, a soul is a soul that requires a seat in a lifeboat.
If there was one slot left for anyone to book a cruise before that cruise was sold out, an infant booked on a cruise prevents an adult from booking that available slot.  Given the price models for the industry an infant is no different from an adult right down to the capacity of a muster zone that groups of cabins are assigned to with all the guests in those cabins having a seat in the lifeboats assigned to that muster station.
It's common for new parents to hope for a break in pricing for an infant but the price models for everyone who books a cruise are built so many common costs are covered or shared by the masses of adults booking that cruise.  "But it's just one baby" until there are 30 or 40 or 100 babies on a ship that carries several thousands of passengers.  At that point for a cruise line to offer cheaper rates to infants someone else has to pay more and that would be all the other adults.  That's fine from a socialist perspective but not all other adults want to cover the cost of someone else's infant.  
Fortunately for parents Royal does offer Kids Sail Free promotions but as many families discover those rates require more expensive cabins that can accommodate more than two guests which gets back to the seats in a lifeboat concept.  The vast majority of cabins on a ship are designed for two guests and that is part of the safety equation so that every guest has a seat in a lifeboat.  Hotels on land don't have lifeboats with finite seating capacity so cruise ships are not at all like hotels in this regard which can be a hard concept for some families to wrap their heads around. 
"It's just a tiny infant" except it isn't from a safety on a ship perspective.   If safety regulations were to be relaxed then there would be some less honest company that would attempt to circumvent safety regulations by over-stuffing a ferry or some other type of passenger vessel to leverage such a loophole.  For this reason safety regulations are not flexible even though a reputable company like Royal may not choose to find a way around the regulations should the regulations be less strict than they are. 
These regulations are international and they have evolved over the decades generally resulting from loss of life and previous disasters.    
And so it's complicated, more than apparent at first glance.

Every soul on board must have a seat in a lifeboat.  This applies even to an infant that is 6 months old even though an infant at that age would not use their own seat in a lifeboat.  SOLAS regulations don't recognize or reflect a difference from an infant to an adult, a soul is a soul that requires a seat in a lifeboat.
If there was one slot left for anyone to book a cruise before that cruise was sold out, an infant booked on a cruise prevents an adult from booking that available slot.  Given the price models for the industry an infant is no different from an adult right down to the capacity of a muster zone that groups of cabins are assigned to with all the guests in those cabins having a seat in the lifeboats assigned to that muster station.
It's common for new parents to hope for a break in pricing for an infant but the price models for everyone who books a cruise are built so many common costs are covered or shared by the masses of adults booking that cruise.  "But it's just one baby" until there are 30 or 40 or 100 babies on a ship that carries several thousands of passengers.  At that point for a cruise line to offer cheaper rates to infants someone else has to pay more and that would be all the other adults.  That's fine from a socialist perspective but not all other adults want to cover the cost of someone else's infant.  
Fortunately for parents Royal does offer Kids Sail Free promotions but as many families discover those rates require more expensive cabins that can accommodate more than two guests which gets back to the seats in a lifeboat concept.  The vast majority of cabins on a ship are designed for two guests and that is part of the safety equation so that every guest has a seat in a lifeboat.  Hotels on land don't have lifeboats with finite seating capacity so cruise ships are not at all like hotels in this regard which can be a hard concept for some families to wrap their heads around. 
"It's just a tiny infant" except it isn't from a safety on a ship perspective.   If safety regulations were to be relaxed then there would be some less honest company that would attempt to circumvent safety regulations by over-stuffing a ferry or some other type of passenger vessel to leverage such a loophole.  For this reason safety regulations are not flexible even though a reputable company like Royal may not choose to find a way around the regulations should the regulations be less strict than they are. 
These regulations are international and they have evolved over the decades generally resulting from loss of life and previous disasters.    
And so it's complicated, more than apparent at first glance.

No apology necessary.  After all, it was your vacation - not a working vacation.  Thank you for taking us along. I have now added Galapagos Island on my bucket list. 

I apologize for not answering this sooner, I somehow lost your post in the travels home or busy life post-cruise.
1) My research led me to the conclusion there are pros and cons to each month and season.  Each visit to the Galapagos will be unique.  Dry versus rainy season sounds evident but that doesn't mean there will be, or not be, rain any week.  The expedition leader does a great job creating an experience unique to the week you are there.  Perhaps if I visited a number of times I could answer better but I have a hard time believing any Galapagos trip would be disappointing. 
2) Some suites have an infinite verandah.  In this type of suite you can lower the full width window and a part of your suite becomes your balcony but when you close it you have the full floorspace at your disposal.  My cabin was "classic" meaning the more traditional outside balcony with a door.  We are all individuals so like so much, it comes down to personal preferences. 
3) I believe there are some advantages to door to door but that depends on your comfort traveling internationally and risk tolerance.  I planned extra time and picked an early flight to buffer my day and give me options should the inevitable airlines delays occur.  There is a lot of comfort in just letting someone else coordinate everything and dealing with any irregularities that come up.
4) Snorkeling gear was in abundance.  I didn't try to do kayaking so I can't comment.  The kayaking equipment is dictated by the Galapagos National Park.  No other line can offer more as it is controlled by the Park.  One cruise maybe few guests desire to kayak and the next week many more do, I don't know, but it's not like they can add more kayaks, the Park doesn't allow them to.  It is what it is.  No other activity had restrictions I am aware of.
5) Looking back with nothing but fond memories I'm not sure what else Silversea could have done.  I'm hopeful this thread will answer a lot of questions or fill in things I didn't know to ask going into this experience.  

Thanks, all.   We’re feeling pretty awesome tonite !  

Fantastic documentation - quality photos - you could publish the Twangster Cruise Coffee table Book.   

After a warm shower and a cold drink delivered by my butler it was time to head down to the Explorers Lounge for another lecture and our final destination talk.
The Bloody Baroness (see drink menu posted much earlier).

After the talk it was dinner in the dining room.  I managed to slip in before anyone else so here are some pictures of the dining room aboard the Silver Origin.


 Dinner menu:

I apologize for not answering this sooner, I somehow lost your post in the travels home or busy life post-cruise.
1) My research led me to the conclusion there are pros and cons to each month and season.  Each visit to the Galapagos will be unique.  Dry versus rainy season sounds evident but that doesn't mean there will be, or not be, rain any week.  The expedition leader does a great job creating an experience unique to the week you are there.  Perhaps if I visited a number of times I could answer better but I have a hard time believing any Galapagos trip would be disappointing. 
2) Some suites have an infinite verandah.  In this type of suite you can lower the full width window and a part of your suite becomes your balcony but when you close it you have the full floorspace at your disposal.  My cabin was "classic" meaning the more traditional outside balcony with a door.  We are all individuals so like so much, it comes down to personal preferences. 
3) I believe there are some advantages to door to door but that depends on your comfort traveling internationally and risk tolerance.  I planned extra time and picked an early flight to buffer my day and give me options should the inevitable airlines delays occur.  There is a lot of comfort in just letting someone else coordinate everything and dealing with any irregularities that come up.
4) Snorkeling gear was in abundance.  I didn't try to do kayaking so I can't comment.  The kayaking equipment is dictated by the Galapagos National Park.  No other line can offer more as it is controlled by the Park.  One cruise maybe few guests desire to kayak and the next week many more do, I don't know, but it's not like they can add more kayaks, the Park doesn't allow them to.  It is what it is.  No other activity had restrictions I am aware of.
5) Looking back with nothing but fond memories I'm not sure what else Silversea could have done.  I'm hopeful this thread will answer a lot of questions or fill in things I didn't know to ask going into this experience.  

I apologize for not answering this sooner, I somehow lost your post in the travels home or busy life post-cruise.
1) My research led me to the conclusion there are pros and cons to each month and season.  Each visit to the Galapagos will be unique.  Dry versus rainy season sounds evident but that doesn't mean there will be, or not be, rain any week.  The expedition leader does a great job creating an experience unique to the week you are there.  Perhaps if I visited a number of times I could answer better but I have a hard time believing any Galapagos trip would be disappointing. 
2) Some suites have an infinite verandah.  In this type of suite you can lower the full width window and a part of your suite becomes your balcony but when you close it you have the full floorspace at your disposal.  My cabin was "classic" meaning the more traditional outside balcony with a door.  We are all individuals so like so much, it comes down to personal preferences. 
3) I believe there are some advantages to door to door but that depends on your comfort traveling internationally and risk tolerance.  I planned extra time and picked an early flight to buffer my day and give me options should the inevitable airlines delays occur.  There is a lot of comfort in just letting someone else coordinate everything and dealing with any irregularities that come up.
4) Snorkeling gear was in abundance.  I didn't try to do kayaking so I can't comment.  The kayaking equipment is dictated by the Galapagos National Park.  No other line can offer more as it is controlled by the Park.  One cruise maybe few guests desire to kayak and the next week many more do, I don't know, but it's not like they can add more kayaks, the Park doesn't allow them to.  It is what it is.  No other activity had restrictions I am aware of.
5) Looking back with nothing but fond memories I'm not sure what else Silversea could have done.  I'm hopeful this thread will answer a lot of questions or fill in things I didn't know to ask going into this experience.