I Think storing Bitcoin in the bank is not possible and it is a flop idea. It is essential to classify holding bitcoin custody to yourself so that users have full control over their assets. But, the rise of centralized exchanges is increasing third-party involvement in Bitcoin transactions greatest to more approvals from go-betweens. In start bitcoin was firstly proposed as a decentralized currency but it has now moved to decent investment assets. In my opinion Bitcoin's original purpose was to enable peer-to-peer transactions without involving any third party but the increasing involvement of centralized exchanges and government complication in every country has raised questions about Bitcoin true goal.

Very well said. Satoshi didn't make Bitcoin for us to just entrust it back to the banks. Yeah, the idea seems to be a business potential trend but we don't have to avail such service when we can do it on our own.

It defeats the purpose of having Bitcoin when you have everything on your hand and then, you're going to go with handling fees and other fees that you have to pay upon availing the service.

I don't buy into this service because that's entirely not what Bitcoin is all about. There could be those people that are scared to death on how to keep their Bitcoins and might avail this kind of service but hopefully, they learn on their own that they shouldn't entrust their Bitcoins with anyone.

Makes sense. Asking for personal info goes against the privacy vibe of Bitcoin. Being your own bank with a secure wallet and private key sounds more in line with the crypto spirit. Plus no worries about potential bank hacks or data breaches. Keep it simple and in your own hands

Not your keys; not your coins, why would someone lose custody of their funds, lose their privacy and lose the security of their funds by storing it in a 'BTC bank'. We already have enough to worry about with people who store their funds in centralized exchanges and deposit it in lending and earning platforms, and now you come up with this idea that is far more risky and should never be developed. If you want to store BTC for the long term, use a hardware wallet or an airgapped wallet.

Well said, to know if your idea is good or not, OP should build it, don't give up your dreams or plans just because of people's opinions. Like centralized exchanges, thousands of people complain and criticize them, but millions still use them, they still have a large customer base. Many investors even use them not only to trade but also to store their bitcoins even though this goes against the decentralized nature of bitcoin.

OP, the use of CEX is not encouraged or supported, but as you can see, they are the largest growing entity in the market.

I believe that one of the sole purpose why satoshi brought about the idea of Bitcoin was to create an alternative  decentralised currency where there would be no third parties as the bank normally do, but from your idea, it seems you'll be in control of users funds and control the withdrawal system, of which a lot of people won't buy such ideas. Moreover the fees you placed for withdrawal it's much even the procudure is stressful, a lot of people won't want to undergo such stres just to withdraw their money, it just like queuing in the  bank for withdrawal, which can be very stressful.

 Maybe you should consider reducing your charges for deposit and withdrawal, then people might consider banking their crypto in your dream App, also if you make the withdrawal process less stressful, i guess it might be considered as well. Come to think of it, there are many exchanges with wallets where people could save their crypto currencies without passing through much stress of paying huge fees if they fail to hold for a long time.

 A lot of things could make people consider their choice of saving for a long time, especially emergency and health issues etc, so i think you should consider that and maybe retrace your ideology, well I'm not trying to discourage you, it's just my honest opinion.

By the way, the genesis of this idea--that people want a service to keep their Bitcoin safe rather than doing it themselves--is the same phenomenon I wrote about in the Anon Paradox: that most people do not want to take on the challenge of keeping their wealth protected. Most people don't own a safe, a gun, and are trained to use those things. Most people would actually be terrified knowing their their life savings could be lost or stolen while keeping it physically on their own person.

(And the paradox here is that for small amounts that people are comfortable with losing, they do want to handle that themselves in order to keep anonymity).

There are a lot of things that don't make sense according to the OP's idea as you mentioned but those things can change later through customer feedback. I won't rely on that and hastily conclude that his ideas and plans will definitely fail. What I want to know is whether he really has the bravery and qualifications to do this, or he just comes up with an idea but has no knowledge about it.

Many people object to OP's idea of creating a centralized service but let's see how centralized exchanges have been and still exist. So our hasty conclusion that he will fail because this is a centralized project is not convincing enough.

It would be much more profitable to keep money in the bank instead of depreciating it due to inflation but to convert that money into bitcoins. Keeping money in bank is very risky in my country so I can't agree to keep money in bank for now. So I took the long term holding plan by converting my savings into bitcoins and keeping them in the wallet.

The risk of using centralized exchanges to store your coins is not in that it goes against the decentralized nature of BTC, but that it puts the coins you store in there at risk. Centralized exchanges confiscate people's funds for any reason at all and they also use customers' money to fund their own businesses, and so they can lose it at anytime and lead to exchange to bankruptcy.