(Let me start by saying that it seems like many people are judging this book without having actually read even much of it.)
My apologies, LRichard. I thought that in asking questions about the book's approach, you were critiquing it for pretending to be an esoteric guide. My original point is not a straw man, however. Some people on this thread DO seem to be critiquing the book for leaving out esoteric content (or at least historical/authorial meanings, which amounts to roughly the same thing given Waite's credentials).
Personally, I'm more troubled by the blind spots in some of the standards of judgment here than I am about the book's supposed deception. Believing that "some symbols are esoteric, some are not" brings up all sorts of indefensible thoughts about tarot tradition, the scope of authority, etc. I choose to judge the book's value on its utility rather than its adherence to indeterminate history/systems, and for beginners I think that it is quite useful. In fact, how anyone could possibly expect such a slim volume to deliver a deep or complete look at the RWS is unclear to me. Beyond the size, it should be at least somewhat clear from the use of "Top 10" lists that the book is intended to be used as a quick reference.
I could go on (I can see how "ultimate" may be mutually exclusive of "beginner," although that's certainly not a rule), but it seems like we should just agree to disagree on our opinions of the book. It is useful for those looking for intuitive insights (perhaps some that are unique to Fiebig & Burger), but it is certainly not comprehensive or concerned with certain aspects of the RWS's history.
(Of course, what I cannot defend at all in the book is closrapexa's point about some inexplicable statements--absolutely true, and unfortunate for a book I believe is aimed at beginners.)