Cigna V Aetna

There is a move from a noncompetitive insurance environment to a competitive one because the competition was not by hospitals to provide the best and cheapest care, but rather among the insurers to get the healthiest patients. Consumer driven plans are central to the process because they are ideal for risk selecting the young and fit who have been driven to new plans. Healthy people could watch their account balances grow which leaves the truly sick behind in traditional plans. This particular type of competition is being used to attract the healthy and in turn lead to price increases because insurers have little incentive to control the prices medical providers are charged. It is the responsibility of the patients to worry about the cost and the patient does not have the same power as the insurance competitors do. According to a key South African regulator, Alex van den Heever of the Council for Medical Schemes, “Competition based on the shifting of risk

More and more people with medical insurance are relying on the health care system as new technologies and treatments become available. This leads to a grater number of claims for payment by insurance companies, the costs of which are passed back to health care consumers. The baby-boom generation is entering its peak health-care using period. Over eighty million Americans will turn 50 in the next 10 years. The cost of providing heath care for these individuals will be staggering

Despite the large number of funds, the market is an oligopoly, this is due to relatively concentrated top five funds accounting for 83% market share at Jun-13; this is shown in the graph below (JP Morgan, 2015). These five top funds include Medibank, BUPA, HCF, HBF and NIB. While there is a long-tail of smaller players, acquisition activity over the past five years has been relatively limited with only a handful of deals as shown below in the table below. This reflects the fact that smaller restricted and not-for-profit player have not been squeezed out due to being given the access to scale efficiencies through third-party collective bargaining groups (white label other insurance companies policies), technology as well as benefits from risk equalization. Large players such as BUPA and Medibank sought acquisitions (refer to table) and/or vertical integration to get scale, efficiencies and brand power. The large funds in addition are investing heavily in wellness benefits to enhance their brand proposition, and are shunning the online aggregators. Some of the medium sized insurers such as NHF, Australian Unity, and HCF are seeking to grow outside their home states, to maximize their potential

What’s next? Some experts say that if the consumer-directed approach doesn’t succeed, em wash their hands of health care altogether. A recent study by the Employee Benefit Researc showed that the proportion of U.S. residents covered by employment-based health benefits d percent in 2000 to 60 percent in 2004. Decades from now, observers may conclude that a counter- revolution in employer coverage began in these early years of the 21st century. —Terence F. Shea

The cost of health insurance has changed drastically over the years as it has become more expensive. Depending on personal characteristic, the cost of health insurance may vary. For instance, as individuals grow older the more expensive it becomes. In this case, health insurance is more costly because “older individuals require more health care” therefore “the cost of providing health care is rising” (Madura &Atlantic, 2012). Not only does this affect the high cost of health insurance, but the number of individuals uninsured. As stated by Madura and Atlantic (2012), “about one in every five workers is uninsured” and has increased since then because health insurance has become unaffordable. As a result, individuals tend to seek health care elsewhere as they can no longer

Employers are continuing to face rising health benefit costs and are constantly looking for alternatives to control these escalating costs. Health benefit premiums continue to increase at a double digit pace for employers and employees (Poor, Ross & Tollen, 2004). This escalation is putting environmental pressures on all impacted stakeholders. Companies and insurance providers are squeezing this industry to get a handle on cost while still providing an appropriate level of care. This cycle puts the patient front and center as the ultimate stakeholder who incurs changes in health benefits. This mandate of cost control, efficient operations and market share has facilitated a constant analysis of the dynamic health

Health care costs are a longstanding concern to policymakers. For years, health care spending has been rising faster than the rate of economic growth, raising the question of what factors are responsible for rising health care costs. This paper explores published articles that report results from research conducted on technological innovations in health care and its relation to rising health care costs. The cost increases have a significant effect on households, businesses, and government programs. Health care experts indicates the development and diffusion of medical technology as primary factors in explaining the persistent

The short term decision to start in a limited area and then only grow by one state in 2015 may have served the purpose of limiting risk during a time of uncertainty, however, in the long term, penetrating into new markets may be difficult because individuals currently enrolled are automatically re-enrolled at the end of the period. For Aetna, it may be harder to pull a member from a plan that they currently have. The largest healthcare insurance company UnitedHealth was more conservative than Aetna in the first two years, with participating starting in five states in year one then increasing to 24 in year two. With the addition of UnitedHealth in the same markets as Aetna and the unknown risks associated with new enrollees for the 2015 plan year, the short term could be crucial for Aetna. If Aetna is able to add to 2014’s positive results, and increase membership in markets that UnitedHealth entered, it will go a long way toward their long term goals of increasing membership in the individual and small group sector (Demko, 2014).

Managed care and its competition is being viewed to solve their issue on the struggle to control

Although Anthem is regarded as highly lucrative, the company’s profit margins are extremely low due to the highly competitive and regulated industry. Because there is limited opportunities for market growth, health insurance companies remain competitive by merging with other companies. Anthem is currently in the process of finalizing an acquisition deal with Cigna. This deal has been faced with much scrutiny and pushback from government due to monopoly regulations. If the deal does not go through, Anthem will have to pay a large penalty fee to Cigna. Along with this financial cost, Anthem would also lose time and resources that they have dedicated to this strategy over the past two years. Because of the competitive environment and high stakes, Anthem began cutting costs throughout the company.

HMOs multiplied rapidly with the new federal giveaways. Managed care, now including PPOs, mushroomed. Employers initially perceived managed care plans as cheaper than traditional fee-for-service insurance. Gradually, they stopped offering a choice of health plans, making individual policies more expensive. HMOs' penetration of the industry had been subsidized into existence. Government had instituted managed care. Today, while overall quality of patient care remains the best in the world, doctors practice medicine in an increasingly intricate web of rationing and regulations: Physicians are stripped of professional autonomy. As patients wander the maze of managed bureaucracy, costs rise and quality deteriorates. Every American dependent on a third party for health coverage is a potential victim of managed care. And state sponsored management of medicine

As a leading insurance company, Aetna’s primary market broadens to reach those who work full time or part time based on hourly wages through its subsidiary company, Strategic Resource Company (SRC) which was bought by Aetna, Inc in 2005 (SRC: Our Mission, 2012). Aetna’s fourth subdivision target market, which is considered the biggest subdivision, is providing insurance to “employers, third-party administrators, commercial insurance companies and other health plans (Aetna Subsidiaries, 2012)”. These latter targets are aimed at through Aetna’s fourth subsidiary Cofinity which includes over 2.5 million members as of 2009 (About Cofinity, 2009). Besides targeting health insurance consumers, Aetna aimed at a target market that excludes health insurance seekers yet includes health care providers. Through a fifth subsidiary, Medicity, Aetna created another target market subdivision where it can provide health information technology in health care facilities such as hospitals and practices (About Medicity, 2012). Finally, Aetna aims at acquiring shareholders and therefore targeted a market of

The health sector is among the most important sectors in the United States economy. The government has enacted certain laws that affect the corporation’s activities and the insurance industry in general. The regulation affects competition among the health insurance companies, and the insurance industry in general.

Another group often blocked is complementary or alternative health care practitioners. These restrictions and the insurance industry unwillingness to pay for these services, gives the physicians an almost monopolist control over health care. Providers must be able to enter the market for competition to work and there must be many providers vying for the patient. To get the most out of health insurance plans Consolidation of hospitals and multispecialty group practices increases the negotiating leverage of the group but in certain areas of the US a single large medical system has become the sole provider of major health service thereby restricting competition (Shi & Singh, 2008). This consolidation while giving the hospitals and group practice leverage when negotiating prices of supplies and services tends to increase the price of health care to the patient because there is no longer any competition (Shi & Singh, 2008). For these reason “competition will remain less effective in most health care markets, because the prerequisite for fully competitive markets are not fully met” (Federal Trade, 2004, p. 20).

There are many different forms of competition among health care organizations. Some of them are the prices of services, different co-pays someone will have to pay out of pocket, lower premiums, they have to be competitive in the quality of the service in which they perform daily. The health care competition is being advertised every day. The competitive nature of business cause them to reach out to the community. The health care industry has to fight for the approval of the community, the government, the insurance companies, the pharmaceutical companies and of course the stake holders as well as future investors.