AHIP Exam AHM-250 Topic 4 Question 105 Discussion

Actual exam question for AHIP's AHM-250 exam

Question #: 105
Topic #: 4

The scandent Health Group contracted with the Empire Corporation to provide behavioral healthcare services to.

Empire employees. As a condition of providing behavioral healthcare services, scandent required Empire to contract with scandent for basic medical services scandent's actions constituted the type of antitrust violation known as a

AHorizontal group boycott

BPrice-fixing agreement

CHorizontal division of markets

DTying arrangement

Show Suggested Answer

Suggested Answer: D

by Kayleigh at Jan 13, 2025, 07:10 PM

Limited Time Offer

25%

Off

Get Premium AHM-250 Questions as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF

Contribute your Thoughts:

Submit Cancel

Noe

1 months ago

I'm no Jedi, but I've got a good feeling about D. Tying arrangement. Gotta keep those Empire employees healthy, am I right?

upvoted 0 times

...

Shala

1 months ago

Ha! This is just a classic case of the Empire striking back at the Rebel Alliance. Or was it the other way around? Either way, I'm going with C. Horizontal division of markets.

upvoted 0 times

Denise

3 days ago

I agree with you, C) Horizontal division of markets sounds right.

upvoted 0 times

...

Zoila

8 days ago

I believe it's B) Price-fixing agreement.

upvoted 0 times

...

Yun

13 days ago

I'm going with D) Tying arrangement.

upvoted 0 times

...

Fletcher

21 days ago

I think it's A) Horizontal group boycott.

upvoted 0 times

...

Howard

2 months ago

B. Price-fixing agreement seems plausible too. The provider could be setting the prices for the medical services.

upvoted 0 times

Vincent

1 months ago

C) Horizontal division of markets

upvoted 0 times

...

France

1 months ago

A) Horizontal group boycott

upvoted 0 times

...

Vilma

2 months ago

Hmm, that makes sense too. Scandent's actions do seem to align more with a tying arrangement.

upvoted 0 times

...

Marvel

2 months ago

I disagree, I believe the correct answer is D) Tying arrangement.

upvoted 0 times

...

Roxane

2 months ago

Hmm, this seems like a clear-cut case of a horizontal group boycott (A). The provider is excluding competitors from the market.

upvoted 0 times

Dick

1 months ago

Either way, it's definitely an antitrust violation. They are limiting competition in the market.

upvoted 0 times

...

Gerardo

2 months ago

I think it could also be a tying arrangement (D), where they are forcing Empire to contract with them for basic medical services.

upvoted 0 times

...

Shawnna

2 months ago

I agree, it definitely looks like a horizontal group boycott (A). They are trying to control the market.

upvoted 0 times

...

Vilma

2 months ago

I think the answer is A) Horizontal group boycott.

upvoted 0 times

...

Antione

2 months ago

I think the answer is D. Tying arrangement, where the provider requires the customer to purchase additional services as a condition of the primary service.

upvoted 0 times

Karl

1 months ago

I'm not sure, but I think it might be a price-fixing agreement.

upvoted 0 times

...

Karina

1 months ago

I think it could also be a horizontal group boycott.

upvoted 0 times

...

Kerry

2 months ago

I agree, it does sound like a tying arrangement.

upvoted 0 times

...