Toby, the paper you referenced in your OP is from a guy named Michael Courtney, who tried his very best to publicly denigrate Bryan Litz and Berger Bullets in regard to published BC values here, and on a number of other internet shooting forums. Believe whatever values you wish, but I would strongly suggest taking his motive into account when you read things like this.
The bottom line is that BCs can change from Lot to Lot of bullets, and can even differ within a single box, due to length variance. The real question is, how fine an increment can you shoot? If you can't shoot the difference, it might as well not be there. Most shooters don't have the proper setup to precisely measure BCs, and will commonly use drop at a known distance to make a crude estimate. I do this routinely and if the estimate is within the limitation of precision of the particular setup I'm testing at a given distance, that's all I need to know. If not, I'll adjust my "working" BC value accordingly. Too many other variables including ambient temperature and velocity can change during the course of even a few hours to even render a standardized BC value the "limiting source of error". For that reason, no BC number printed on a box of bullets or listed on an internet website will ever be better than actual drop data for a given setup. If you're doing a type of shooting that requires long range (cold bore) shots at unknown distances where you don't have solid drop data, I'd agree that the better the BC value you have, the better your chance of making first round hits. For most, BCs published by the manufacturer and tested/validated occasionally by the shooter will be more than sufficient.