IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/jcomle/v6y2010i4p771-809..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Not Good Enough For Government Work: Geographic Market Definition And The Ftc'S Case Against Chicagoland Physician Associations

Author

Listed:
  • Gregory D. Adams
  • Fred S. McChesney

Abstract

In the past decade, the Federal Trade Commission has brought many cases opposing joint contracting by independent practice associations (IPAs), including a high-profile case against the Evanston Medical Group IPA in suburban Chicago. The FTC frequently claims that such contracting is per se illegal. This article criticizes the FTC's approach to evaluating joint contracting by IPAs. As described herein, joint contracting by IPAs have potential precompetitive benefits, as well as potential anticompetitive costs. Thus, rule of reason treatment is appropriate. This article also describes issues related to market definition and market power under such a rule of reason analysis.

Suggested Citation

  • Gregory D. Adams & Fred S. McChesney, 2010. "Not Good Enough For Government Work: Geographic Market Definition And The Ftc'S Case Against Chicagoland Physician Associations," Journal of Competition Law and Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 6(4), pages 771-809.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:jcomle:v:6:y:2010:i:4:p:771-809.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/joclec/nhp031
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • L40 - Industrial Organization - - Antitrust Issues and Policies - - - General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:jcomle:v:6:y:2010:i:4:p:771-809.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/jcle .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.