No, the discussion was whether the earlier Tarzan films were big-budget A-pictures or not; you, with your usual inimitable combination of offensively in-your-face cockiness and jaw-droppingly astonishing ignorance, said they weren't. Read some of the entries under MGM on this page (http://www.geostan.ca/films.html)  and actually get a handle on how big the Tarzans were in their time; the idea of a primitive but noble hero living in a jungle paradise and keeping unspoiled by fighting off both local animal and native enemies and greedy exploiters from the outside world proved a really resonant idea with audiences during the Depression.  

A few additional facts and figures: The first Tarzan film, Tarzan the Ape Man, was budgeted at $652, 675 (which, adjusted to inflation, translates to $9,519,001 in 2015); its worldwide gross was $919,000, which translates to $13,403,244 today--definitely a "big" picture.

Tarzan And His Mate, the second and most popular of the MGM Tarzans, was more expensive but also more lucrative; it cost MGM about $1,279,142 to make--which translates to $18,655,769 in 2015. It grossed, worldwide, $2,239,000, which would be $32,654,911 today.

The fact that Burroughs disliked the Tarzan movies has absolutely nothing to do with whether they were hits or not; the Fleming quote about Dr. No evidences, most authors don't really care for screen adaptations--and it never has the slightest effect on the box-office. A few other examples: A. E. W. Mason loathed the 1939 movie adaptation of his The Four Feathers; John Buchan didn't particularly care for Hitchcock's version of his book The 39 Steps; the nephew of Carlo Collodi (author of Pinocchio) asked Mussolini's government to sue Walt Disney for his movie version of his uncle's book.

Burroughs' own Tarzan production, incidentally, was a low-budget serial that was filmed on location and was closer to Burroughs' conception, but which didn't make anywhere near the profit the MGM Tarzans did--partly because the location filming wreaked so much havoc on cast and camera equipment; again, international filming simply wasn't feasible until the post-war era.