That is a very interesting question, Ronald! I don’t think I can give a definite answer, but here is my thinking…

As a reference and part of its broadband goals, the Broadband Commission has been using the target of households paying no more than 5% of its monthly income on broadband access.

In my opinion, while 5% of a household’s monthly income might be reasonable to budget for Internet access, I am more inclined to emphasise value for money – how fast is the internet plan for the price being paid?

Also, in addition to broadband Internet, a household is likely to be paying for other telecoms services, e.g. fixed-line telephony, mobile/cellular communications, and/or cable/subscriber TV, all of which would need to be budgeted for.

Hence ultimately, I am of the view that the faster the Internet plan that can be secured, the better, as there might be a whole host of other telecoms-related expenses that might also need to be factored in.

Hi Ronald,

Thanks for the question and the continued support.

The download speed, 2 Mbps, has been a widely used threshold, by organizations such as the International Telecommunications Union, when classifying an Internet service as broadband.

Having said this, and as transmission speeds continue to increase, depending on the country or region, the threshold is being lifted. For example, the Federal Communications Commission in the US has recently voted to increase the minimum download speeds in its broadband definition from 4 Mbps to 25 Mbps, and the minimum upload speed from 1 Mbps to 3 Mbps.

However, ultimately and for our purposes, the true importance of selecting 2 Mbps is really to try to have a focal point to conduct the assessment.

2nd question: What percentage of monthly income would you think is “acceptable”?