This is called Transfer Pricing.

From the current CBA on revenue sharing:

(2) “Defined Gross Revenue” shall mean the aggregate operating revenues from baseball operations received, or to be received on an accrual basis, as reported by each Club on an annual basis in the Club’s FIQ. “Baseball Operations” shall mean all activities of a Club that generate revenue, except those wholly unrelated to the business of Major League Baseball. Baseball Operations shall include (by way of example, but not by way of limitation)…

(3) “Central Revenue” shall mean all of the centrally-generated operating revenues of the Major League Clubs that are administered by the Office of the Commissioner or central baseball including, but not limited to, revenues from national and international broadcasting agreements (television, cable, radio and Internet), Major League Baseball Properties, Inc., Baseball Television, Inc., Major League Baseball Enterprises, Major League Baseball Advanced Media, Inc., the Copyright Arbitration Royalty Panel, superstation agreements between the Commissioner’s Office and the Clubs whose games are transmitted on a distant signal (“Superstation Agreements”), the All- Star Game and national marketing and licensing.

(4) “Local Revenue” shall mean a Club’s Defined Gross Revenue less its share of Central Revenue.

(5) “Actual Stadium Expenses” shall mean the “Stadium Operations Expenses” of each Club, as reported on an annual basis in the Club’s FIQ.

(6) “Net Local Revenue” shall mean a Club’s Local Revenue less its Actual Stadium Expenses.

(7) The “Base Plan” shall be a 34% straight pool plan. The amount of net payment or net receipt under the Base Plan for each Major League Club shall be determined as follows: Each Club contributes 34% of its Net Local Revenue to a putative pool; that pool is then divided equally among all Clubs, with the difference between each Club’s payment into the putative pool and its receipt therefrom producing the net payment or net receipt for that Club.

The emphasis above is mine. RSN revenues are not considered to be “wholly related” to the business of baseball. While this seems odd, say advertisement for the Bruins is going well NESN, but sales for the Red Sox, are not. It is this commingling aspect that creates the shading between what is truly MLB related revenues and those outside of MLB related revenues.

As a note…

There is a level of gray area on RSNs and clubs. Turner South, while owned by Time Warner, would have made the cut here as Time Warner owns the Braves. RSNs such as the regional Fox holdings like Fox Sports NW, would not be included as these RSNs are not owned and controlled in some fashion by one of the clubs. WGN, for example, is owned by the Tribune Co., which owns the Cubs.

So, to recap, it’s RSNs with clubs attached to the ownership of the RSNs that is the discussion.