The translation states:
"...she was a dancer at that tavern, where he (the prince) went to relax in secret" Ch. 2.2 p. 3
The prince could have only gone to the tavern once, and this statement would stand true. But the prince equally could have become a regular and shown up multiple times and this statement would still be true.
Also:
"the prince had an argument with that dancer and in revenge..." Ch 2.2 p. 3
If this happened the first time he showed up to the tavern, then there is no logical problem here. But once again, if the prince became a regular and only had the argument on, say, his 20th visit, then this statement is still logically sound.
In other words, the prince may become a regular and only later on have the argument that caused the tavern's downfall without the guidebook being wrong about what happens.