BlackFriday 2024! Hurry Up, Grab the Special Discount - Save 25% - Ends In 00:00:00 Coupon code: SAVE25
Welcome to Pass4Success

- Free Preparation Discussions

AHIP Exam AHM-250 Topic 5 Question 84 Discussion

Actual exam question for AHIP's AHM-250 exam
Question #: 84
Topic #: 5
[All AHM-250 Questions]

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

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: D

Contribute your Thoughts:

Weldon
5 months ago
I see your point, both options could be valid depending on the specific details of the case.
upvoted 0 times
...
Casie
5 months ago
It could also possibly be a tying arrangement as mentioned in option D.
upvoted 0 times
...
Katlyn
5 months ago
Do you think it could be a horizontal group boycott as mentioned in option A?
upvoted 0 times
...
Weldon
5 months ago
I believe scandent's actions could be considered a type of antitrust violation.
upvoted 0 times
...
Casie
5 months ago
Yes, it seems to be related to a contract for healthcare services.
upvoted 0 times
...
Katlyn
5 months ago
I think the question is about antitrust violations.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lorrine
5 months ago
I'm not sure, but I think B) Price-fixing agreement could also be a possibility.
upvoted 0 times
...
Truman
5 months ago
Actually, I think it might be C) Horizontal division of markets.
upvoted 0 times
...
Pa
6 months ago
I disagree, I believe it is D) Tying arrangement.
upvoted 0 times
...
Chaya
7 months ago
I think the answer is A) Horizontal group boycott.
upvoted 0 times
...
Alaine
7 months ago
Haha, you guys are really overthinking this. It's obviously a price-fixing agreement. Scandent is forcing Empire to pay a certain price for their services, right? That's classic price-fixing.
upvoted 0 times
...
Nicholle
7 months ago
Hmm, I don't know. I was thinking it might be a horizontal group boycott, where Scandent is coordinating with other healthcare providers to exclude Empire from the market. But the tying arrangement makes more sense to me.
upvoted 0 times
...
Angelo
7 months ago
I think you're on the right track, Avery. A tying arrangement is when a company with market power in one product forces customers to also buy a second, separate product. That seems to fit the scenario here.
upvoted 0 times
...
Avery
7 months ago
Okay, let's break this down. Scandent required Empire to contract with them for basic medical services in order to receive their behavioral healthcare services. This sounds like a 'tying arrangement', where a company requires a customer to purchase one product or service in order to get another.
upvoted 0 times
...
Jettie
7 months ago
Yeah, I agree. This question seems to be testing our knowledge of different types of antitrust violations. From what I can tell, the scenario involves some sort of exclusionary practice by Scandent Health Group.
upvoted 0 times
Rikki
6 months ago
Actually, I think it might be C) Horizontal division of markets.
upvoted 0 times
...
Hailey
6 months ago
No, I believe it's D) Tying arrangement.
upvoted 0 times
...
Dona
6 months ago
I think the answer is A) Horizontal group boycott.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Jacqueline
8 months ago
Hmm, this is an interesting question. I'm not sure what the correct answer is, but I'll give it my best shot. I think the key here is to understand the concept of an antitrust violation and how it applies to this specific scenario.
upvoted 0 times
...

Save Cancel