You describe the European clubs as „financially responsible and sustainably spending.“ I asked you why Gazprom-sized corporations are not interested in financing the hockey clubs in Sweden, Finland, Czech Rep etc. Do you really believe those clubs would refuse the financing from such corporations? I see another problem here – the European hockey clubs have closed doors to these corporations because 1) their leagues are unattractive from business point of view, so marketing & all 2) clubs leaderships are not professionals from big business, they do not know how big business works. 3) corruption & amateurism of employees
If I were you, I would think about these & other reasons. The European club hockey needs more money from different sources. Once again, I am not saying the one corporation to finance all budget. I just say that the hockey officials need to bring the big corporations to European hockey. Looks like, they are not able to do that.
And you blame the KHL for the structure of their clubs budgets. You present is as „unresponsibility.“ I would say it is just different way of doing. It is stable enough. And the KHL is doing everything to diversify the clubs revenues, they have been going step by step. It can not be done within a day.
Last but not least, the European clubs have much lower budgets than KHL clubs. It is much easier to be profitable in such enviroment. The level is too low for European clubs. Last season showed us how un/stable the European clubs business model is.