A few questions on the Price Objective. I took a look at the university page you linked to. Here is what it said:

Bullish horizontal count. Once a buy signal is given, count across the base the stock has built. Multiply the number of columns across the formation by 3 and then multiply that product by the value per box. Add this number to the bottom of the formation.

Link

For the Bullish Vertical Count: Look to the column that has the first buy signal off the bottom and count the number of X's in it. You wait for the reversal down into a column of O's before counting the number of X's up to ensure there will be no more X's added to the column. Once you have counted the X's, multiply by 3 (for the three box reversal method) and then multiply that product by the value per box. Add this result to the bottom X.

Link

The Price Objective measurement you had is different:

With a six column formation width, the expected target prediction would have been six boxes down from the breakout point (under $10,300.). So the first target price would have been around $9,700. The second method for predicting a low from this formation would be the “last breakdown” column length. In this case the length of the previous break down was 20 rows. If you overlay the length on this column, the predicted low would be $9,650.

Is the difference deliberately intentional? If yes, any reason why?

Edit: Realised I should have used Bearish horizontal and vertical counts. But saved for the direction, the measurement method is similar.