What do Major League Baseball and health insurers have in
common? They're both granted antitrust exemptions under the
McCarran-Ferguson Act of 1945.
Fortunately for MLB, not too many people in Washington
care about the price of tickets at a Washington Nationals
game (no one's going -- they rank 24th out of 30 in
attendance).
Not so true of health insurers, though. A lot of
politicians
aren't fond ofthe likes of
Aetna (NYSE: AET),
Cigna (NYSE: CI), and
Humana (NYSE: HUM). And it looks as if
there's growing support in Congress to repeal insurers'
federal antitrust exemption. Theoretically, that could be bad
news, as the Federal Trade Commission wields a much bigger
stick than the individual states that are currently in charge
of regulation.
And Buffett cried a little
Berkshire Hathaway (NYSE: BRK-A) owns shares
of
UnitedHealth Group (NYSE: UNH) and
WellPoint (NYSE: WLP), so Buffett has a stake
in the game. But more importantly, he's a big fan of
monopolies.
Monopolies are the types of companies that Fools
dream of. They aren't a guarantee of instant profits, but
all things being equal, little to no competition is better
than a lot of it.
Companies with monopolies or at least near-monopolies
usually have high margins, because who else are customers
going to turn to? Think
Google (Nasdaq: GOOG) for search engines.
Monopolies
can be broken, but the large size of the giants in the
industry makes doing so really difficult.
Regional monopolies
I've had three different insurance carriers since I
moved back to California seven years ago, as my wife and I
have changed jobs or had our insurance changed by our
employer looking for a better deal. In other parts of the
country, such variety isn't as readily available.
According to a 2007 study of health-insurance markets by
the American Medical Association, 96% of markets were
considered highly concentrated, with just a few insurers. In
64% of the markets, one insurer had more than half of the
market share, and in some states, there's a near monopoly.
Blue Cross/Blue Shield of Alabama, for instance, controls 83%
of the market. In six of the state's 11 major metropolitan
areas, its reach topped 94%.
I'm not sure how much an increase in competition is really
going to decrease costs for consumers, though. Blue
Cross/Blue Shield of Alabama isn't exactly gouging its
members; the company had a profit margin of 0.6% last year.
In places where for-profit companies dominate, there's a
little more play -- UnitedHealth's net profit was 3.7% last
year, but it has been as high as 6.6% over the past five
fiscal years -- but I can't imagine they'd be willing to
lower their prices too much. Competition could result in
companies that become more efficient (and lower their
internal costs), but one would hope that a for-profit company
with net margins that low isn't running that
inefficiently.
Consolidation damage
The biggest problem insurers could face in the repeal
of McCarran-Ferguson could come from an inability of the
industry to consolidate. WellPoint and UnitedHealth have
gotten as big as they have by acquiring companies -- at least
11 each this decade. The larger size allows companies to
spread fixed costs across a larger number of customers and
thus allows them to compete better and/or increase
profits.
On the other hand, if the FTC nixes further mergers for
anticompetitive reasons, the companies that took advantage of
the loophole before it closed up could have a real
competitive advantage. Continued... |