It looks like Rogers at least, is citing Cisco's global usage study and using it to draw conslusions about Canadian usage.
As mentioned in a previous post, it is irresponsible to cite a global study to make claims about Canadian usage. Surely global statistics don't apply to Canadians when Canada's internet is so much slower that the rest of the world's.
They also say that:
"Others say it’s more fair for customers to pay for the amount of bandwidth they actually use. We agree with this approach."
Then why not do this? Ie: Charge based only based on bandwith (2Mbps, 1Mbps, 512kbps, etc) and not based on monthly usage? Monthly usage is not bandwidth. Are you sure you're not getting these confused Rogers?
They are also making claims like:
"Our premium tier provides you so much bandwidth (175 GB) that you could watch streaming video on YouTube every day from 7 a.m. in the morning until midnight without reaching your cap"
Aside from the fact they again confused bandwith (usually measured in Mbps) with monthly usage limit (usually meaasured in Gigs), they also got their numbers wrong. YouTube bitrates vary from 0.25 Mbit/s to 5.0 Mbit/s. Watching from 7am-midnight is 17 hours. 17 hours/day for 30 days is 1 836 000 seconds.
Sure at YouTube's lowest bitrate, you can watch all month and only use ~56 Gigs. But even a modest bitrate of 2.0 Mbit/s will use ~448 Gigs, easily exceeding their Ultimate Internet limit of 175Gb.
By the way, am I the only one who can't get YouTubeHD to work in Canada without long buffering pauses?