If that Beams trade does indeed transpire, it's a complete vindication of a negotiation strategy we could learn a lot from. Collingwood were merely being pragmatic and acting in the best interests of their football club; they flipped the tables on Beams and Brisbane and made it so they were dictating terms.
As much as I agree that Geelong has a lot to learn from Collingwood and their much harsher stance and approach during trade week, but the difference between the Beams deal and the Christensen one is that Collingwood are better equipped to create leverage and get things on their terms because Beams is contracted. Beams is the one who wants out, and Brisbane is the club that wants him, but he is legally bound to Collingwood. Therefore, Brisbane has to satisfy Collingwood in order to get the deal done, because the Pies have made it quite clear that they won't accept anything close to a deal they consider unders and they'll have no qualms with no trading him.
With Geelong and Christensen, the Cats hold little leverage because, if Christensen isn't contracted and wants to go leave, the club can either trade him for something or let him go into the PSD for nothing.
It is an example of why you should try to secure the contracts of your best players as early as possible, as a contracted player will allow the club to yield a far better result than if they're not.