financial ratios

International Journal of Tourism Sciences, Volume 6, Number 1, pp. 95-106, 2006

Tourism Sciences Society of Korea. All rights reserved.

A Comparative Study of Financial Ratios between

Hotels and Restaurants

Dong Jin Kim*

Oklahoma State University, USA

Abstract: Financial information users have long been using financial ratios in order to evaluate companies’ financial conditions and various types of financial ratios have been devised. This study is designed to investigate financial ratios of hotels and restaurants which represent two segments of the hospitality industry. Specifically, this study tests if there is any differences in liquidity ratios, solvency ratios, activity ratios, and profitability ratios between the two segments. The results reveal that liquidity and activity ratios are higher in the hotel segment compared with the restaurant segment. In terms of solvency ratios, the restaurant segment has more capability to satisfy its long-term financial obligations. In contrast, there is no significant difference in profitability ratios among the two segments.

Keywords: Financial Ratios, Liquidity Ratios, Solvency Ratios, Activity Ratios, Profitability Ratios

* PhD candidate in the School of Hotel and Restaurant Administration at Oklahoma

State University. e-mail: [email protected]

96 Dong Jin Kim

INTRODUCTION

Investors and financial analysts have long been using financial ratios in order to evaluate companies’ financial conditions. Consequently, various types of financial ratios have been devised and widely used not only by practitioners but also by scholars. It is considered that financial ratios allow users to analyze relevant data to provide meaningful information for their decision-making (Singh & Schidgall, 2001). According to Hitchings (1999), ratio analysis is a sensitive and valuable tool in credit assessment which is to forecast the ability of a borrower to meet its debt obligations. In addition, Harrison (2003) argued that financial ratio analysis helps hospitality managers determine appropriate strategies and identify problematic areas which need attention. Schmidgall (1989) boldly stated that financial ratios are the most meaningful information in financial statements to hospitality executives and managers.

Comparing the financial characteristics of different groups of firms by financial ratios has been a widely used research methodology in finance literature (e.g., Andrew, 1993; Smith, 1997; Meric, Ross, Weidman, & Meric, 1997; Meric, Welsh, Pritchard, & Meric, 2000; Zaman & Unsal, 2000; Li, Liu, Liu, & Whitmore, 2001; Meric, Weidman, Welsh, & Meric, 2002; Gunduz & Tatoglu, 2003; Locke & Scrimgeour, 2003; Meric, Prober, Eichhorn, & Meric, 2004). For example, Andrew (1993) studied the leverage ratio of hotels and restaurants and found out that hotels generally had a higher portion of debt. However, there is a scarcity of empirical study regarding hospitality firms’ financial ratios in spite of the usefulness of financial ratio analysis. Therefore, this study is designed to investigate financial ratios of hotels and restaurants which represent two segments of the hospitality industry. In particular, this study tests if there are any differences in financial ratios between the two segments. It is believed that the findings of this study provide insights regarding financial characteristics of hotels and restaurants to financial information users in the two segments of the hospitality industry.

LITERATURE REVIEW

A Brief Summary of Financial Ratios

A ratio, basically, is a comparison of two numbers. That is, a ratio represents a relationship between two amounts that are represented by a pair of numbers showing how much greater one amount is than the other. In particular, a financial ratio is a ratio of two numbers that expresses the value of one financial variable relative to another and indicates a firm’s activities. Consequently, thousands of financial ratios could be generated in a literal sense.

A Comparative Study of Financial Ratios 97

However, some of them are frequently considered as more meaningful and useful figures. The principle sources for financial ratios are financial statements such as the balance sheet, the income statement, and the cash flows statement. The most commonly used sources for calculating financial ratios are the balance sheet and the income statement. Since both the balance sheet and the income statement provides a great deal of financial information it is still possible to generate hundreds of financial ratios. As a result, users of financial ratios try to reduce a very large number of financial ratios to a small number of categories. Specifically, Andrew and Schmidgall (1993) classified financial ratios into five categories based on the type of information that they provide for hospitality organizations. They are liquidity ratios, solvency ratios, activity ratios, profitability ratios, and operating ratios.

Liquidity ratios generally describe the ability of the company to meet short-term obligations. Solvency ratios, on the other hand, indicate the ability of the company to pay long-term financial obligations. Activity ratios point out efficiency in management’s use of the enterprise’s assets. In addition, profitability ratios identify management’s return on sales and investments. Finally, operating ratios address management’s efficiency with regard to its operation. In assessing the financial ratios, it needs to be kept in mind that the financial ratios themselves do not provide valuable information about a firm’s performance. Rather, financial ratios of a specific company should be compared and contrasted to standards or norms in order to provide meaningful information for the management’s decision-making (Temlng, 1985; Lawder, 1989; Andrew & Schmidigall, 1993). These standards or norms could be industry averages, the company’s historic data, competitors’ figures, or planned ratio goals.

Review of Related Literature

As mentioned, many studies have been conducted to compare the financial characteristics of different groups of organizations. Most notably, Meric conducted a series of studies to compare financial ratios of firms in different countries with colleagues (Meric et al., 1997; Meric et al., 2002; Meric et al., 2004). Other scholars have also conducted studies to compare financial ratios of different groups of firms (e.g., Smith, 1997; Zaman & Unsal, 2000; Li et al., 2001; Gunduz & Tatoglu, 2003; Locke & Scrimgeour, 2003). The popularity of comparing financial characteristics of firms in different segments, industries, or countries is understandable because it is believed that firms within a particular segment (industry or country) are intrinsically homogeneous.

On the other hand, some researchers have tried to provide a guideline in conducting financial ratio analysis. For instance, Hsieh and Wang (2001) stressed the importance of selecting proper financial ratios in conducting financial ratio analysis. They proposed an approach for finding useful financial

98 Dong Jin Kim

ratios and demonstrated a case study with property development firms. In essence, they insisted that financial ratio analysis should be industry-specific in order to suit the industry since each industry has its own unique business practices and external business environment. In addition, Voulgaris, Doumpos, and Zopounidis (2000) proposed a methodological framework for estimating small and medium size enterprises’ performance based on financial ratio analysis.

In the hospitality industry, Andrew (1993) investigated the leverage ratio of hotels and restaurants and suggested that a value-maximizing capital structure would be a leverage ratio between 55% and 60% in the hotel segment and between 45% and 50% in the restaurant segment. In addition, Upneja, Kim, and Singh (2000) investigated differences in financial characteristics between small and large firms in the casino industry. They discovered that smaller firms had higher liquidity and short-term debt ratio, whereas larger firms had a higher proportion of long-term and total debt. Upneja et al. (2000) also found that larger firms were more profitable than smaller firms.

In contrast, other studies have been conducted to investigate the use of financial ratios in hospitality organizations. For example, Singh and Schmidgall (2001) studied financial ratios commonly used by lodging financial executives. According to them, operating, activity, and profitability ratios were key monitoring ratios. Schmidgall and DeFranco (2004) investigated the use of financial ratios by club managers and reported that payroll cost percentage was the most popular ratio followed by cost of food sold percentage, cost of beverage sold percentage, and current ratio.

METHODOLOGY

Data Collection Procedure

The sample for the current study was drawn from the Standard & Poor’s COMPUSTAT database for the period from 2000 to 2004 based on 4-digit Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) code: hotels with SIC code of 7011 and restaurants with SIC code of 5812. Initially, a total of 131 firms (26 hotels and 105 restaurants) were detected. However, firms with excessive number of missing values and extreme values were dropped from the initial list resulting in a total of 108 firms (19 hotels and 89 restaurants) for data analyses.

Since financial ratios tend to fluctuate from one year to another, financial ratios computed with one year could be influenced by unusual circumstances which happened in that year thereby obscuring true financial characteristics of a firm. On the other hand, financial ratio averages for too long of a time period may not be appropriate as well because they could indicate a firm’s financial characteristics that may no longer exist (Smith, 1997; Meric et al., 1997; Meric


et al., 2002; Meric et al., 2004). Many previous studies in finance utilized a time frame of five years in computing financial ratios (e.g., Meric et al., 2002; Omran & Ragab, 2004; Meric et al., 2004). Therefore, following previous studies, financial ratios used in this study are five-year averages for the 2000-2004 time periods.

Definition of Variables

Out of five types of financial ratios suggested by Andrew and Schmidigall (1993), operating ratios are not included in the current study due to intrinsic differences between hotels and restaurants. As a matter of fact, the two segments differ in their natures even though they both belong to the hospitality industry. For example, a hotel’s revenue could mostly come from its room division, whereas a restaurant’s revenue comes entirely from food and beverage sales. Therefore, as Andrew and Schmidigall (1993) suggested operating ratios such as a mix of sales and food cost percentage will not result in meaningful comparisons.

Accordingly, this study includes liquidity, solvency, activity, and profitability ratios. Liquidity ratios embrace current ratio, quick ratio, accounts receivable turnover, and operating cash flows to current liabilities ratio. Solvency ratios include debt to total assets ratio, debt to equity ratio, long-term debt to total capitalization ratio, times interest earned ratio, and operating cash flows to total liabilities ratio. Activity ratios incorporate inventory turnover, fixed asset turnover, and asset turnover. Finally, return on assets, return on equity, and net profit margin are included in profitability ratios. The financial ratios and their definitions used in this study are presented in Table 1.

Table 1. Financial Ratios Used in The Study

Category Financial Ratio COMPUSTAT

Mnemonic This Study

Liquidity Current Ratio = Current Assets/Current Liabilities

CR CR

Quick Ratio = (Cash and Equivalents + Accounts Receivable)/Current Liabilities

QR QR

Accounts Receivable Turnover = Sales/Average Accounts Receivable

– ART

Operating Cash Flows to Current Liabilities Ratio = Operating Cash Flows/Average Current Liabilities

– OCFC

L

Solvency Debt to Total Assets Ratio = (Total Debt/Total Assets) × 100

DAT DA

Debt to Equity Ratio = (Total Debt/Total Equity) × 100

DTEQ DE

100 Dong Jin Kim

Long-Term Debt to Total Capitalization Ratio = (Long-Term Debt/Total Capital) × 100

LTDCAP LDTC

Times Interest Earned Ratio = Earnings Before Interest and Taxes/Interest Expense

– TIE

Operating Cash Flows to Total Liabilities Ratio = Operating Cash Flows/Average Total Liabilities

– OCFL

Activity Inventory Turnover = Cost of Goods Sold/Average Inventories

INVX IT

Fixed Asset Turnover = Sales/Average Fixed Assets

FXATO FAT

Asset Turnover = Sales/Average Total Assets

ATT AT

Profitability Return on Assets = (Income Before Extraordinary Items /Total Assets) × 100

ROA ROA

Return on Equity = (Income Before Extraordinary Items /Common Equity) × 100

ROE ROE

Net Profit Margin = (Income Before Extraordinary Items /Sales) × 100

NPM NPM

Note: Financial ratios without COMPUSTAT mnemonics are calculated by the researcher

Data Analysis

The data was analyzed using Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) version 12.0. First, descriptive statistics regarding financial characteristics of the sampling firms are presented. The financial characteristics incorporate total assets, log of assets, sales, log of sales, market value of equity, earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization (EBITDA), and earnings before interest and taxes (EBIT). Additionally, in order to test the differences in financial ratios of hotel and restaurant firms, multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) technique was utilized. Items appearing in the financial statements are highly correlated to one another leading to high correlations among financial ratios (Lawder, 1989; Zeller, Stanko, & Cleverly, 1997). Thus, researchers suggest that MANOVA is an appropriate statistical technique to compare financial ratios of different groups of firms (e.g., Smith, 1997; Meric et al., 2002; Meric et al., 2004). Further, Mann-Whitney U-tests (non-parametric statistical analyses) are carried out in order to compare financial ratios of the two segments because of the small number of sample size (especially for the hotels) and unbalanced sample size between the two segments.


RESULTS

Descriptive statistics are used to capture key financial characteristics of the sample and are reported in Table 2. As shown, firms in the pooled sample have a mean value of assets of $1,354.33 million (median of $248.88 million), a mean sales of $1,337.33 million (median of $286.92 million), and a mean market value of equity of $1,768.42 million (median of $185.17 million). In addition, the means (medians) of EBITDA and EBIT are $198.46 million ($28.40 million) and $133.92 million ($15.89 million) respectively.

Hotel companies have a mean value of assets of $2,952.90 million (median of $1,083.94 million), a mean sales of $1,594.96 million (median of $405.43 million), and a mean market value of equity of $3,059.28 million (median of $1,002.43 million). Also, the means (medians) of EBITDA and EBIT are $259.98 million ($60.14 million) and $153.04 million ($35.04 million) respectively. Further, restaurant companies have a mean value of assets of $999.09 million (median of $158.46 million), a mean sales of $1,280.07 million (median of $238.76 million), and a mean market value of equity of $1,488.47 million (median of $144.59 million). In addition, the means (medians) of EBITDA and EBIT are $184.79 million ($24.94 million) and $129.67 million ($11.61 million) respectively. On the whole, hotel companies are larger than restaurant companies.

Table 2. Descriptive Statistics of The Sample

Variable Mean Std. Dev. Min. Med. Max.

Total Total Assets ($mil)

1,354.33 3,488.45 .05 248.88 27,837.50

Log of Assets 5.34 2.27 -3.04 5.52 10.23

Sales ($mil) 1,337.33 2,963.53 .09 286.92 19,064.70

Log of Sales 5.61 2.01 -2.43 5.66 9.86

Market Value of Equity ($mil)

1,768.42 4,959.76 .00 185.17 40,305.99

EBITDA ($mil) 198.46 575.66 -9.06 28.40 5,120.00

EBIT ($mil) 133.92 433.10 -16.01 15.89 3,981.70

Hotel Total Assets ($mil)

2,952.90 3,817.00 .09 1,083.94 12,298.00

Log of Assets 6.64 2.70 -2.47 6.97 9.42

Sales ($mil) 1,594.96 2,684.35 5.07 405.43 10,099.00

Log of Sales 6.01 1.91 1.62 6.00 9.22


3,059.28 4,478.23 8.49 1,002.43 14,083.08

102 Dong Jin Kim

EBITDA ($mil) 259.98 400.06 -1.12 60.14 1,197.50

EBIT ($mil) 153.04 241.52 -12.60 35.04 625.19

Restaurant Total Assets ($mil)

999.09 3,332.96 .05 158.46 27,837.50

Log of Assets 5.05 2.07 -3.04 5.07 10.23

Sales ($mil) 1,280.07 3,034.65 .09 238.76 19,064.70

Log of Sales 5.52 2.03 -2.43 5.48 9.86


1,488.47 5,039.48 .00 144.59 40,305.99

EBITDA ($mil) 184.79 609.01 -9.06 24.94 5,120.00

EBIT ($mil) 129.67 466.14 -16.01 11.61 3,981.70

Note: Figures are from financial statements at the end of fiscal year of 2004

Table 3 reports the MANOVA results including both univariate and

multivariate test statistics. Overall, it is found that the financial ratios of hotels and restaurants are significantly different (Multivariate F=6.302, p<.01). There are significant differences in financial ratios between hotels and restaurants with regard to liquidity and activity ratios. In contrast, none of the solvency and profitability ratios are found to be significantly different between the two segments. All the average profitability ratios of both hotels and restaurants are negative indicating that both segments have suffered from adverse economic conditions over the sample period.

The univariate test statistics show that there are significant differences in terms of current ratio (F=15.555, p<.01), quick ratio (F=16.696, p<.01), and operating cash flows to current liabilities ratio (F=7.676, p<.01) between the two segments. On the other hand, there is no significant difference between hotels and restaurants in terms of accounts receivable turnover (F=1.121, p>.05). In regards to activity ratios, fixed asset turnover (F=4.718, p<.05) and asset turnover (F=19.963, p<.01) are found to be significantly different between hotels and restaurants. However, inventory turnover is not significantly different between the two segments (F=2.402, p>.05).

Although MANOVA is an appropriate statistical technique for comparing financial ratios of firms in different segments, the technique relies on strict statistical assumptions. In the case of this study, the sample size is small (especially for the hotels) and the sample numbers hotels and restaurants are unbalanced. Thus, the Mann-Whitney U-test, a non-parametric statistic technique, is considered as an alternative. A series of Mann-Whitney U-tests detect additional significant differences in financial ratios between hotel firms and restaurant firms. The results of the Mann-Whitney U-tests for liquidity, activity, and profitability ratios are identical to those of MANOVA in terms of significance. When it comes to solvency ratios, however, The results of


Mann-Whitney U-tests identify significant differences between hotel and restaurant firms with regard to debt to equity ratio (Z=-2.764, p<.01) and times interest earned ratio (Z=-2.062, p<.01). The results of the Mann-Whitney U-tests are also presented in Table 3.

Table 3. MANOVA and Mann-Whitney U-tests results Hotel Restaurant p-val

ue Financial Ratios

Mean Std. Dev.

Mean Std. Dev.

F-value

p-value

Z-value

CR 1.75 1.97 .84 .45 15.555 .000** -2.739 .006**

QR 1.47 1.96 .55 .40 16.696 .000** -3.143 .002**

ART 1.71 .85 2.06 1.38 1.121 .292 -1.811 .070

Liq

uid

ity

OCFCL 34.82 115.76

1.40 2.03 7.676 .007** -1.965 .049*

DA 37.63 18.03 41.08 59.77 .062 .805 -1.343 .179

DE 194.05 256.39

46.25 325.28 3.455 .066 -2.764 .006**

LDTC 45.25 24.61 40.12 54.46 .161 .689 -1.533 .125

TIE .73 4.31 29.72 138.71 .824 .366 -2.062 .039*

Solv

ency

OCFL 93.21 260.86

14.67 149.62 3.205 .076 -1.182 .237

IT 50.90 40.55 65.71 37.22 2.402 .124 -1.787 .074

FAT 50.75 207.42

3.77 4.47 4.718 .032* -4.200 .000**

Activ

ity

AT .86 1.34 1.75 .62 19.963 .000** -5.273 .000**

ROA -10.69 46.61 -8.67 75.61 .012 .911 -1.594 .111

ROE -8.46 21.75 -13.16 78.88 .066 .798 -1.626 .104

Pro

fitability

NPM -.92 13.64 -9.23 64.84 .307 .580 -.311 .756

Multivariate F = 6.302, p-value = .000**

Note: * p<.05, ** p<.01

104 Dong Jin Kim

CONCLUSION

Discussion

This study has compared 15 financial ratios of hotels and restaurants which represent two segments of the hospitality industry. The findings of this study suggest that there are significant differences in financial ratios between hotel and restaurant companies. In general, liquidity ratios are higher in the hotel segment compared with the restaurant segment, indicating that the hotel segment has more capability to meet its short-term financial obligations. However, accounts receivable turnover, one of the liquidity ratios, does not differ in the two segments. Additionally, activity ratios are generally higher in the hotel segment as well, indicating that hotels use their assets more efficiently than restaurants. Among the three activity ratios, fixed asset turnover and asset turnover are significantly different between hotels and restaurants. This finding is particularly encouraging for hotels because they have a higher proportion of assets (especially fixed assets) which might be derived from long-term financing.

Further, Mann-Whitney U-tests detect differences between hotel and restaurant companies in terms of debt to equity ratio and times interest earned ratio that are solvency ratios. The debt to equity ratio is defined as total debt divided by total equity. It is generally believed that the lower the debt to equity ratio, the less risk perceived by creditors. Consistent with the findings of Andrew (1993), it is found that hotels have higher debt portion than restaurants. On the other hand, times interest earned ratio is defined as earnings before interest and taxes divided by interest expense representing the number of times interest expense can be covered by available earnings. Thus, the creditors value a higher times interest earned ratio. The times interest earned ratio is lower in the hotel segment than in the restaurant segment. Thus, one can conclude that the restaurant segment, in general, has more capability to satisfy its long-term financial obligations.

LIMITATIONS

There are several limitations associated with the current study. First, this study only includes the hotel and restaurant segments of the hospitality industry. Even though, the two segments are representative segments of the industry, there are other segments in hospitality such as airlines, resorts, and casinos. Thus, future research is suggested to include more segments of the hospitality industry. In addition to segment, financial ratios could vary based on other variables such as total assets, market value of equity, and the number of employees. Therefore, future research might consider those variables. Finally,


selecting appropriate financial ratios is an initial and critical procedure of conducting financial ratio analysis. Furthermore, they might be different according to industry, segment, and economic condition in which they are applied. Thus, it is suggested that future research explorer how to select proper financial ratios to be used for the hospitality industry and each segment of the industry.

REFERENCES

Andrew, W. P. (1993). Capital structure in the hospitality industry. In Andrew, W. P., & Schmidgall, R. S. (Ed.), Financial management for the

hospitality industry. (pp. 240-242). MI: Educational Institute of the American Hotel & Motel Association.

Andrew, W. P., & Schmidgall, R. S. (1993). Financial management for the

hospitality industry. MI: Educational Institute of the American Hotel & Motel Association.

Gunduz, L., & Tatoglu, E. (2003). A comparison of the financial characteristics of group affiliated and independent firms in Turkey. European

Business Review, 15(1), 48-54. Harrison, J. S. (2003). Strategic analysis for the hospitality industry. Cornell

Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly, 44(2), 139-152. Hitchings, R. (1999). Ratio analysis as a tool in credit assessment. Commercial

Lending Review, 14(3), 45-48. Hsieh, T. & Wang, M. H. L. (2001). Finding critical financial ratios for

Taiwan’s property development firms in recession. Logistics

Information Management, 14(5/6), 401-412. Lawder, K. E. (1989). Ratios 101: Back to the basics of financial analysis.

Business Credit, 91(6), 28-30. Li, S., Liu, F., Liu, S., & Whitmore, G. A. (2001). Comparative performance of

Chinese commercial banks: Analysis, finding and policy implications. Review of Qualitative Finance and Accounting, 16(2), 149-170.

Locke, S., & Scrimgeour, F. (2003). Testing the consistency of New Zealand SME financial ratios across industry groups. Journal of American

Academy of Business, 3(1/2), 166-173. Meric, I., Prober, L. M., Eichhorn, B. H., & Meric, G. (2004). Integration and

the financial characteristics of manufacturing firms in the European Union. American Business Review, 22(2), 88-97.

Meric, I., Ross, L. W., Weidman, S. M., & Meric, G. (1997). A comparison of the financial characteristics of U.S. and Japanese chemical firms. Multinational Business Review, 5(2), 23-27.

106 Dong Jin Kim

Meric, I., Weidman, S. M., Welsh, C. N., & Meric, G. (2002). A comparison of the financial characteristics of U.S., E.U., and Japanese manufacturing firms. . American Business Review, 20(2), 119-125.

Meric, I., Welsh, C. N., Pritchard, R. E., & Meric, G. (2000). A comparison of the financial characteristics of U.S. and Japanese electronics firms. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 17(1), 175-185.

Omran, M. & Ragab, A. (2004). Linear versus non-linear relationships between financial ratios and stock returns: Empirical evidence from Egyptian firms. Review of Accounting & Finance, 3(2), 84-102.

Schmidgall, R. S., & DeFranco, A. L. (2004). Ratio analysis: Financial benchmarks for the club industry. The Journal of Hospitality

Financial Management, 12(1), 1-14. Schmidgall, R. (1989). Financial ratios: Perceptions of lodging industry general

managers and financial executives. FIU Hospitality Review, 7(2), 1-9. Singh, A., & Schmidgall, R. (2001). Use of ratios by financial executives in the

U.S. lodging industry. The Journal of Hospitality Financial

Management, 9(1), 27-44. Smith, M. B. (1997). Significance testing for cross-sectional influences in

working capital in industrial firms listed on Johannesburg Stock Exchange. Journal of Financial Management & Analysis, 10 (2), 33-36.

Temling, W. P. (1985, February). Financial ratio analysis: Get the true measure of your operation’s profitability. Lodging, 27-29.

Upnega, A., Kim, H., & Singh, A. (2000). Differences in financial characteristics between small and large firms: An empirical examination of the casino industry. The Journal of Hospitality

Financial Management, 8(1), 23-35. Voulgaris, F., Doumpos , M., & Zopounidis, C.(2000). On the evaluation of

Greek industrial SME’s performance via multicriteria analysis of financial ratios. Small Business Economics, 15(2), 127-136.

Zaman, M. R., & Unsal, F. (2000). Comparative performance of American, European and Japanese automobile companies in the 1990s. American

Business Review, 18(1), 115-122. Zeller, T. L., Stanko, B. B., & Cleverly, W. O. (1997). A new perspective on

hospital financial ratio analysis. Healthcare Financial Management,

51(11), 62-66.

Submitted Dec 17th, 2005 Accepted Jan 25th, 2006 Referred anonymously

financial ratios

Documents

Transcript of financial ratios