More USAP heat

[Howard888]

Warren, Blumenthal Call on Private Equity-Backed U.S. Anesthesia Partners to Answer for its Anticompetitive Tactics and Impacts on Prices, Patients, and Providers | U.S. Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts

The Official U.S. Senate website of Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts

www.warren.senate.gov

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[kidthor]

When you look at the WaPo article about the same thing, the comments below all blame us as greedy anesthesiologists. This is one of the central problems that ASA has enabled - the anticompetitive behavior of the overlords (PE backed AMCs) is viewed as money-sucking behavior by anesthesiologists. ASA should denounce PE and AMCs as leeches and show the flow of money away from patients and physicians and to PE, AMCs, hospitals, the AHA, and so forth - but instead they're complicit in this scheme.

WaPo

 

[IMGASMD]

When you look at the WaPo article about the same thing, the comments below all blame us as greedy anesthesiologists. This is one of the central problems that ASA has enabled - the anticompetitive behavior of the overlords (PE backed AMCs) is viewed as money-sucking behavior by anesthesiologists. ASA should denounce PE and AMCs as leeches and show the flow of money away from patients and physicians and to PE, AMCs, hospitals, the AHA, and so forth - but instead they're complicit in this scheme.

WaPo

You know you HAVE TO join asa if you want to work for some AMCs right? They promise certain set revenue for asa. You scratched my back, I scratched yours.

 

[aneftp]

“We have long argued against the use of restrictive non-compete agreements, and supported efforts by the FTC to prohibit their use. Non-compete clauses in the health care industry reduce patient access to care, increase health care costs, limit a physician’s ability to negotiate, stifle competition, contribute to labor shortages, and limit the ability of workers to speak out about unfair or dangerous practices,” the Senators continued”

If Senator Elizabeth Pocahontas Warren

If she were serious. Than ask why the American Hospital Association is trying to stop the non compete ban. Hmm

 

[Shimmy8]

Just spouting off the same politically driven agenda of the FTC nonsense.

Let's hear about United and Optum next then???

 

[GravelRider]

“We have long argued against the use of restrictive non-compete agreements, and supported efforts by the FTC to prohibit their use. Non-compete clauses in the health care industry reduce patient access to care, increase health care costs, limit a physician’s ability to negotiate, stifle competition, contribute to labor shortages, and limit the ability of workers to speak out about unfair or dangerous practices,” the Senators continued”

If Senator Elizabeth Pocahontas Warren

If she were serious. Than ask why the American Hospital Association is trying to stop the non compete ban. Hmm

It’s “then” not “than.”

I don’t get what you are saying. We know why the American Hospital Association is trying to stop the non-compete ban. I’m sure Elizabeth Warren knows as well. Is your statement/question rhetorical?

 

[aneftp]

It’s “then” not “than.”

I don’t get what you are saying. We know why the American Hospital Association is trying to stop the non-compete ban. I’m sure Elizabeth Warren knows as well. Is your statement/question rhetorical?

My question/statement is stop picking on little usap. The ftc is a bully. They rather go after the small bratty kid (usap) than the real big boys, the American hospital association.

Tell the senators to address the non compete first. And this means directly going toe to toe with the AHA. Once they resolve the non compete issue. They can go after usap.

But the senators are chicken. The ftc has back tracked and wants to wait some more before attacking the aha on the non compete.

 

[<(^_^)>]

Just spouting off the same politically driven agenda of the FTC nonsense.

Let's hear about United and Optum next then???

““We urge DOJ and FTC to closely scrutinize UnitedHealth’s proposed acquisition of Amedisys and oppose the growing trend of insurers buying up health care providers to reduce competition and pad their profits at the expense of their patients,” Warren and Jayapal reportedly wrote in a letter to the Department of Justice (DOJ) Tuesday.”

Lawmakers Elizabeth Warren, Pramila Jayapal Urge DOJ To Further Scrutinize Optum-Amedisys Deal

Lawmakers are hoping to direct further scrutiny toward UnitedHealth Group’s (NYSE: UNH) pending deal of the home health giant Amedisys Inc. (Nasdaq:

homehealthcarenews.com

“Just a year after the MLR requirement was put in place, UnitedHealth Group formed Optum, which now includes a PBM and a specialty pharmacy, as well as over 70,000 physicians”

https://www.warren.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/2023.11.21%20Letter%20to%20HHS%20OIG%20regarding%20MLR%20evasion.pdf

Not like they’re ignoring optum/united health.

 

[Coffee PRN]

It’s “then” not “than.”

I don’t get what you are saying. We know why the American Hospital Association is trying to stop the non-compete ban. I’m sure Elizabeth Warren knows as well. Is your statement/question rhetorical?

@triggermaster thoughts?

 

[GravelRider]

My question/statement is stop picking on little usap. The ftc is a bully. They rather go after the small bratty kid (usap) than the real big boys, the American hospital association.

Tell the senators to address the non compete first. And this means directly going toe to toe with the AHA. Once they resolve the non compete issue. They can go after usap.

But the senators are chicken. The ftc has back tracked and wants to wait some more before attacking the aha on the non compete.

My guess is that any over-arching FTC rule outlawing non-competes would be challenged almost immediately. Given the current state of our Supreme Court, there is a 100% chance that any FTC rule would be immediately overturned…especially after the AHA gifts a few Winnebagos to the justices.

I always felt the FTC talk regarding non-competes was meant to push states to pass laws outlawing them, which would be much more enduring than the FTC swinging whichever way the current presidential administration wants it to.

 

[triggermaster]

When you look at the WaPo article about the same thing, the comments below all blame us as greedy anesthesiologists. This is one of the central problems that ASA has enabled - the anticompetitive behavior of the overlords (PE backed AMCs) is viewed as money-sucking behavior by anesthesiologists. ASA should denounce PE and AMCs as leeches and show the flow of money away from patients and physicians and to PE, AMCs, hospitals, the AHA, and so forth - but instead they're complicit in this scheme.

WaPo

It WAS greedy anesthesiologists selling out younger and future docs and current and future patients in exchange for a buy out.

 

[HemeOncHopeful19]

My guess is that any over-arching FTC rule outlawing non-competes would be challenged almost immediately. Given the current state of our Supreme Court, there is a 100% chance that any FTC rule would be immediately overturned…especially after the AHA gifts a few Winnebagos to the justices.

I always felt the FTC talk regarding non-competes was meant to push states to pass laws outlawing them, which would be much more enduring than the FTC swinging whichever way the current presidential administration wants it to.

No chance the FTC rule doesn’t exempt high paying physicians IMO when the head of the FTC is married to an Academic Cardiologist… we will find he mysteriously gets a big name title and a nice bonus a few months later.

 

[aneftp]

It WAS greedy anesthesiologists selling out younger and future docs and current and future patients in exchange for a buy out.

The Colorado docs did not get a good as a deal as Dallas Houston and Orlando original usap buyouts.

Look a public court cases of some group partners lol. Or other legal records. The buyouts were less than 1 million each partner. In exchange for giving up 20% of income forever (626k cash and 224k fake usap stock) in exchange for 5 years employment. Original 3 got over 2 million cash and 600k usap shares)

The original 3 buyouts were 3x as much as the Colorado docs. It was not a good deal for the Colorado docs. But usap stock was anticipated to be worth 3x as much with ipo. So those Colorado docs were anticipating a lot more coming.

 

[MirrorTodd]

The Colorado docs did not get a good as a deal as Dallas Houston and Orlando original usap buyouts.

Look a public court cases of some group partners lol. Or other legal records. The buyouts were less than 1 million each partner. In exchange for giving up 20% of income forever (626k cash and 224k fake usap stock) in exchange for 5 years employment. Original 3 got over 2 million cash and 600k usap shares)

The original 3 buyouts were 3x as much as the Colorado docs. It was not a good deal for the Colorado docs. But usap stock was anticipated to be worth 3x as much with ipo. So those Colorado docs were anticipating a lot more coming.

lol Classic F around and find out situation.

 

[nimbus]

It WAS greedy anesthesiologists selling out younger and future docs and current and future patients in exchange for a buy out.

Everybody has a price. Even the young’uns.

 

[nimbus]

The Colorado docs did not get a good as a deal as Dallas Houston and Orlando original usap buyouts.

Look a public court cases of some group partners lol. Or other legal records. The buyouts were less than 1 million each partner. In exchange for giving up 20% of income forever (626k cash and 224k fake usap stock) in exchange for 5 years employment. Original 3 got over 2 million cash and 600k usap shares)

The original 3 buyouts were 3x as much as the Colorado docs. It was not a good deal for the Colorado docs. But usap stock was anticipated to be worth 3x as much with ipo. So those Colorado docs were anticipating a lot more coming.

Yeah they were just stupid.

 

[triggermaster]

Everybody has a price. Even the young’uns.

That’s not a valid argument to defend their wrongdoing.
Tu quoque fallacy?

 

[nimbus]

That’s not a valid argument to defend their wrongdoing.
Tu quoque fallacy?

I’m not defending anything. I am pointing out that a lot of people complaining about sellouts would sell out themselves if the price was right. That’s just reality. If someone offered you $200k for a beat up 2011 Camry, 99.9999% of people would sell it.

 

[aneftp]

Yeah they were just stupid.

MD only practices equal partner track groups the buyout price usually 1 million cash around 2012-2015. They got slightly above fair market value if the usap stock was valued at 700k or more plus their 624k cash

Remember ipo was suppose to be end of 2017/beginning of 2018. Envision was just purchased by kkr for 9 billion end of 2017

So i don’t care it stupid. Just they were sold on usap stock being higher anticipated value

My buddy made out like a bandit with Mednax stock 4x its value from his strike point from an early buyout. So he got 1 million dollar cash plus mednax stock worth about 1 million when he cashed out at the peak.

Just a matter of timing.

The more crna heavy the practice along with good payor mixed. I’ve seen buyouts at the peak as much as 8 million in act model with the average being 2 million

In MD only equal practice buyouts averaged 1 million.

 

[nimbus]

MD only practices equal partner track groups the buyout price usually 1 million cash around 2012-2015. They got slightly above fair market value if the usap stock was valued at 700k or more plus their 624k cash

Remember ipo was suppose to be end of 2017/beginning of 2018. Envision was just purchased by kkr for 9 billion end of 2017

So i don’t care it stupid. Just they were sold on usap stock being higher anticipated value

My buddy made out like a bandit with Mednax stock 4x its value from his strike point from an early buyout. So he got 1 million dollar cash plus mednax stock worth about 1 million when he cashed out at the peak.

Just a matter of timing.

The more crna heavy the practice along with good payor mixed. I’ve seen buyouts at the peak as much as 8 million in act model with the average being 2 million

In MD only equal practice buyouts averaged 1 million.

Our MD only group had a similar offer around the same time. There was a lot of doom and gloom at the time about declining reimbursements. The driver was fear. Our board didn’t even present the offer to the members for a vote because it was not a good offer.

I guess if things went south, we would have regretted not selling but they didn’t go south.

 

[AKMD_1984]

Green v. U.S. Anesthesia Partners of Colo., No. 22-1319 | Casetext Search + Citator

Read Green v. U.S. Anesthesia Partners of Colo., No. 22-1319, see flags on bad law, and search Casetext’s comprehensive legal database

casetext.com

 

[AKMD_1984]

I dont know whats goin on - USAP seems to be a target everywhere from every angle.

although looking at this particular lawsuit, I am not sure if USAP is at fault here at all

 

[GassYous]

I dont know whats goin on - USAP seems to be a target everywhere from every angle.

although looking at this particular lawsuit, I am not sure if USAP is at fault here at all

Hit the big dog to get the little ones in line

 

[aneftp]

Hit the big dog to get the little ones in line

USAP is little compared to the real big dogs envision , team health

Maybe. FTC figures taking on usap will be easier since they aren’t as big.