The question asks for two business risks of migrating to Google Cloud Deployment Manager. Business risks are those that could negatively impact the company's operations, finances, or strategy, rather than purely technical limitations. Based on the community discussion and best practices:

• C (Cloud Deployment Manager is unfamiliar to the company's engineers): This is a business risk because it requires time and resources for training, potentially delaying migration and increasing costs. The engineers' lack of familiarity could lead to errors, inefficiencies, and slower adoption, directly impacting business operations and time-to-market.

• F (Cloud Deployment Manager only supports automation of Google Cloud resources): This is a business risk due to vendor lock-in and limited flexibility. If the company adopts a multi-cloud or hybrid strategy in the future, they cannot use Deployment Manager for non-GCP resources, potentially requiring additional tools and increasing complexity and costs. This aligns with the consensus that F represents a strategic limitation, not just a technical one.

Other options are less suitable:

• A: Using Python is not a risk; it's a widely adopted language.
• B: API deprecation is a general risk for any cloud service, not specific to this migration context.
• D: Requiring a service account is a standard security practice, not a business risk.
• E: The ability to delete resources is a feature common to many infrastructure tools and can be mitigated with controls; it's not uniquely a business risk for Deployment Manager.

The community discussion shows strong support for C and F, with many users emphasizing that these represent genuine business risks related to training costs and vendor lock-in, which align with the question's focus on business impact.