It doesn't have anything to do with being American or Russian. Nor even what "school" of shoemaking you adhere to--although I, personally, tend to favour British and Western European styles and techniques...they're so much more refined and evolved.
But if you're not a shoemaker or someone who makes items out of croc, you probably don't know how these hides are sold. In fact, both alligator and crocodile is sold by the cm--as measured across the belly of the hide. It's not how long the animal is or even how many square feet or meters is in the hide. Sold like this, the tail is really incidental. In fact, I doubt you will find too many (if any) tanners or wholesalers of croc that sell just the tails. You're buying the belly, in other words.
And to get a pattern piece out of the tail...which is the coarsest of the leather on a a croc or gator...means that you've bought a fairly large animal and probably already gotten at least one pair if not two pairs of shoes from the belly. Which, in turn, means the hide is already paid for and the tail is thus the cheapest part of the animal.
To say that because the tail is smaller than the belly, it is therefore more expensive, is to completely misunderstand the process and the leather. By that logic the legs...being really small...would be the most expensive of all.
PS...it has nothing to do with being "budget" or not, although you could reasonably make the case that since several other pairs have already been made from the belly, the tail is essentially free and is gravy for the maker.
But more to the point, someone...probably very like yourself...simply liked the large coarse tiles better than the small ones. Why shouldn't the maker use that leather if he has a customer for it...and make an additional, unlooked for, profit?