What makes those 3 cricketing nations more deserving than Zimbabwe? They all looks same to me as far as performance goes, Zim arguably comes at top when comparing them.
And again its not BCCI job to entertain every associate members.
They may not deserve more. But they don't deserve less. Anyway, this argument has nothing to do with the BCCI. Test status is decided by the ICC and the BCCI has not much say on such decisions. The issue props up because Zimbabwe receives $94 million for the 8-year cycle, but the smaller teams receive less than $1 million for this duration. I don't think that there is anything that could justify such a difference in funding between various countries. If Zimbabwe was a high-income generating country for the ICC, then it could have been justified.