Talkin' Baseball... Negotiations (Say Hey!), Epilogue

Regarding my query on the revenue tax numbers, Eric Naftaly had an answer:

Mike: Not sure whether anyone's gotten back to you on this, but according to one of Baseball Prospectus'
analyses (Derek Zumsteg's next-to-last one, I think), the reason for the discrepancy you mention is that the
first $80 million of revenue sharing goes to an MLB fund to be distributed at the discretion of the
commissioner's office (!), before the even distribution of the rest.

Hey, Bud always said he was a consensus-builder.

What I want to know is whether the racketeering laws apply.

Best,
Eric Naftaly

This would explain part of the discrepancy and also why the players' and owners' base revenue differed-since they have different commissioner slush, er, discretionary fund proposals.

I have updated my table adding the commissioner fund, the new total, and the difference between each total and 2001 revenue total ($835 M). There have been no formalized proposals, at least none that were made public, so there are no new lines to add to the table (Note: all numbers are in millions):

Proposal      Pct  Actual  Act. Pct Result Com. Fund Total Diff
Current ('01) 20%  $167     20%     $835     $0      $835     $0
Owner 1       N/A  $282     33.77%   N/A    $85      N/A       N/A
Player 1      N/A  $235     28.14%   N/A    $70      N/A       N/A
Owner 2       37%  $270     32.34%  $729.73 $85      $814.73 $20.27
Player 2    33.3%  $242.30  29.02%  $726.90 $70      $796.9  $38.1
Owner 3       36%  $263     31.50%  $730.56 $85      $815.56 $19.44

The Owners' numbers are still about $20 million off and the players' almost $40 million. I have checked out Doug Pappas' website and there are no other issues that should affect this. What am I missing? "Check me on this-am I losing my frigging mind?"