Neither analogy is perfect.
The point is that if you don’t redeem what you purchase the seller is not responsible for holding your property. Unless their service is holding your property for you.
The service is exchanging fiat for bitcoin not keeping your bitcoin safe. If you didn’t receive your bitcoin I don’t see why they wouldn’t give you the fiat back.
If the seller doesn't want to be responsible for holding your property they can choose to operate like Bull Bitcoin does where they never hold your coins.
But Swan chooses to hold your Bitcoin. Therefore they assume responsibility for holding your Bitcoin.
Isn’t the whole fuzz that Swan didn’t build their own infrastructure so they use partners like fortress trust which are the ones that actually hold the bitcoin they sell?
In any case if you’re buying bitcoin or any good for that matter by definition someone else holds the good until you buy and redeem it.
