The reason why Sikorsky's profit line for the current year would not be as healthy with Cyclone delivery as it would be if Cyclone delivery is further delayed is because of the late delivery withhold along with Canada's continued reluctance to pony up the full development costs (ie. Cyclone NRE cost overrun) at time of delivery. If delivery occurs under the current terms, Sikorsky would be delivering aircraft to Canada at a loss. There is no late delivery penalty for being later than 300 days, so that penalty would have been maxed out long ago.... in other words, further delays come at no cost to the contractor.
One of the reasons there are extra bumps on the airframe is because all of the mission equipment called for in the original contract does not fit inside anything smaller than an AW101. There has been no mission creep, although the final weight has turned out to be much higher than Sikorsky said it would be back in 2004.
The overland and daytime in-sight-of-the-ground flight restrictions are related to safety/airworthiness issues for which reasons I only have scant info. My guess (speculation) based upon the little that I have been able to gather is that the restrictions are related to some unresolved fly-by-wire certification matters and also, the MGB reliability. I have been told that the initial poor reliability of the FBW servo actuators has been resolved and is no longer a concern.
Hope this helps to answer some questions.