SAN ANTONIO — In 1996, Peter Holt joined the Spurs' ownership group with modest expectations.

He soon discovered how difficult the business of the NBA could be. Injuries to key players, including Hall of Fame center David Robinson, led to the worst record in franchise history at 20-62.

Since his tough “rookie” season, the Spurs chairman has not experienced another losing record, seen his team win five NBA championships and watched the value of the franchise skyrocket.

Holt's typical candor was on display in a wide-ranging discussion that included his views about his team's place in NBA history, the dynamics of ownership-by-committee and the future of Spurs coach Gregg Popovich and his “Big Three” stars — Tim Duncan, Manu Ginobili and Tony Parker:

Q: You're the chairman of a team that just won a fifth NBA championship, its first since 2007. Do you think these Spurs can be considered a dynasty?

A: It's an interesting question. I don't believe it's a dynasty relative to sports. I do believe it's a dynasty relative to the fact you've got Popovich and Tim, so you've got your head coach for 18 years and your captain of the team, the anchor of the team, being together for 17 years. For that point of view and that continuum, I believe it's a dynasty.

And the same ownership group, the same general manager, R.C. (Buford) — whatever his title has been before he's been the general manager while Pop's been the head coach. They're joined at the hip.

From that point of view, player and coach together for 17 years, which I think is a record, I think it is a dynasty.

Q: Could you possibly have envisioned this run of success?

A: Oh, no, no. I wasn't any pro in the business, by any means, but I loved sports, like most Americans and most people around the world, it seems. But I never thought of this kind of run, and never mind the championships — and there's nothing better — but the 16 or 17 years of 50-plus (wins) and the winning percentage, all those things that go with it and now breaking every record in the NBA because we've been running so long at this level.

Remember, I've only had one losing year and that was my first year, 1996-97, which now I'm glad happened and not just because we got Tim. I didn't know we were going to get Tim. We were third (worst record), not first. But it helped me understand how difficult this business is. It really did. I mean, the year before we had been in the Western Conference finals and we had David. I thought everything was going to be peachy keen and we went 20-62.

The kids that summer, my wife and I told them we were buying into the Spurs and they were all excited because we all loved the Spurs and had season tickets and went all the time. By the end of the season, they said, “Dad, can we sell the Spurs? Everybody on the playground at school thinks you're an idiot.”

That's a true story. Everybody thought I'd screwed it up.

Q: How have you managed the dynamics of an ownership group that consists of 20 individuals and entities?

A: Start with 1993, before I ever showed. That group is the group that really should be given the credit for keeping the team in town. Starting with Gen. (Robert) McDermott, God rest his soul. He put the group together. I don't know if anyone else could have pulled it off.

Luckily, AT&T had just come to town, Ed Whitacre, and he had seen the football team in St. Louis (Cardinals) leave town and he hadn't been here but about six months when Gen. McDermott got with him, and then everybody else jumped aboard in 1993 and put the deal together in 30 days. Credit Red McCombs, because he took less money (for the team) than he could have gotten from somebody who wanted to take the team away. Everybody cooperated to keep the Spurs in town and they're the ones who really kept it here, because I think it really had a chance to go.

Then there were some who had said, “Civic duty; we'll do this and stay in as long as necessary but it's not our long-term play.” So in 1996 I had sold the business to a public company and because the public company had to disclose, the word got out I had some money in my pocket and some people approached me, and one thing led to another in 1996. But essentially it's the same group. Gen. McDermott has died and David Robinson has come in, but that's the only change, really.

I remember getting in and thinking, “Twenty partners? How is this going to work?” I'd never had that many partners and this is a public kind of business that has been a very integral part of the community, which has been great and it's been a wonderful partnership.

Even that first year, 20-62, and me being the new guy and Pop moves in (as coach) after Bob Hill goes and (is) 110 percent supportive always in everything we've done: spending money; running the credit line up to build the AT&T Center; everybody putting their names on the line.

It's a great ownership group. There's no internal dissension. There's no story behind the story. It's just a wonderful group to work with and we've been together a long time, and I'm the new guy. David's newer, but that's it, and the rest since '93. Last year was 20 years for them.

I'm the face of the ownership group, but they're the key. The stability is unbelievable in this ownership group. Nobody wants out. There's a true love there. Very rarely, only when I have to bring it up, do we even talk about the money and what it costs and what it does and how come we're not making more, that kind of stuff. It's always, “What can we do to keep winning?”

That's why we've revamped our whole nonprofit side. Getting the (NBA Development League's Austin) Toros; getting the (Stars) WNBA team; getting the (American Hockey League) Rampage. This group wants to be more and more part of the community, not less. They don't want more money. Nobody has taken one nickel out of this business at all. At all. Every cent goes back in. There's no dividends paid out. There's no distribution even to pay taxes. Zero money has been taken out. That means people are paying taxes out of other incomes.

I'm not saying we won't eventually do that, but for 20 years, we have not. Think about that. That's how strong this group feels about continuing to build this organization.

Q: With Steve Ballmer buying the (Los Angeles) Clippers for $2 billion, what do you think the value of the Spurs franchise is now?

A: Yeah! That doesn't hurt, does it? A rising tide raises all ships.

People bring that up all the time, but probably as interesting for (a) small market is the bracketing. Jerry Buss, who owned the (Los Angeles) Lakers, always argued the Clippers were worth the same (as the Lakers). Franchise to franchise, he said there would always be a percentage cachet because they were the Lakers, but he didn't ever think it would be a big amount because of the market. The Clippers had the same deal at the Staples Center. All they had to do was get an owner who really wanted to make the thing work, and Jerry felt strongly about that. He was one of my mentors.

The other side of it is Sacramento-Milwaukee. That's more relevant to our market. So let's use the latest one. Milwaukee closed a couple months ago and these are real numbers — I'm on the committee — and it was $560 million for the team, and another $100 million guaranteed to help build the arena. So that's $660 million for Milwaukee, with no arena, and that's going to take at least three years to work through all of that. And Sacramento went for $540 (million) and they have to build an arena, so essentially $550 (million) to $600 million, and that's the low now, with the $2 billion high. That's the sweet spot now, whereas it was much lower.

Yeah, we're worth a lot more money. There's no debating that.

Q: Aren't the Spurs, because of the tremendous success, worth more than the Bucks and Kings?

A: I think people think that but, personally, as Jerry Buss talked about with Lakers and Clippers, yes, there is a cachet. If we sold today, would we sell for more than Milwaukee? Yes, I believe we would, partly just because of the organization. But a franchise is a franchise is a franchise. And I think that's why people are willing to buy the Sacramentos and Milwaukees, and forget their wins and losses.

But consider the arena situation. We've got essentially a brand new arena and because of the wonderful citizens of Bexar County, we've got another $100 million we're going to start spending next year to upgrade. And it's only 12 years old. Milwaukee's got to start new. Sacramento's got to start new. And then you've got the whole situation in Milwaukee where you've got a Major League Baseball team there. Pro sports compete with pro sports. We don't. We're the only game in town.

Yes, we'd sell for more, but not just because of winning and losing. It's the whole unique business situation. Very stable. Been here since '73, and if you think about it from Day 1 — with Red and Angelo (Drossos) — it's been extremely stable. (We have) a new arena, relatively speaking, with the citizens of this county and great area being so supportive, and then the stability of the organization.

Q: With that sort of valuation, is there temptation to cash in?

A: We are not selling. I can tell you that. I don't have one owner who is the least bit interested. They haven't even brought it up. Everybody wants to leave it to their kids and their grandkids. They want to be part of this. To be this big a part of San Antonio is really cool.

Q: It's been said early in the 1998-99 lockout season when the team got out to a struggling start that things got a little tense regarding Pop's future on the bench.

A: Not for me it wasn't. I don't know about the rest of the world. That was not going to happen.

Q: Has there ever been a point when you thought this great run had bottomed out? Maybe after the (Phoenix) Suns swept the Spurs in the second round in 2010?

A: Not then. Maybe more after the Memphis series in 2011. Only that maybe it was time to maybe be making more changes to get, quote-unquote, “younger.” That wasn't me and that shouldn't be translated to mean Tim and Manu would be gone. But maybe that we had to force more new people in, playing maybe more minutes and giving those two guys more of a break, because I would never push either one of those guys out because they're going to be here as long as I'm here and as long as they want to be here, and Tony, too, even though he is younger.

All along our goal has been, at least these last five years, and maybe longer, to rebuild the team without crashing. Now, did we think we were going to get to the (NBA) Finals these last two years in that “rebuilding-without-crashing” mentality? No. This has been a nice surprise, a great surprise. And it's because of Tim and Manu and Tony, the threesome, but as important, obviously and because of the coach who has understood the changes that needed to be done as the team has continued to shift and as the game has shifted, from new rules to new players and the different types of coaching and playing that's going on.

Secondly, is R.C. doing a magnificent job — he should have been (NBA) Executive of the Year years ago — continuing to find role players to fit the roles, not only as defined in any given year but the future need. So the Patty Millses, the Boris Diaws, the Tiago Splitters are here and if you don't get what he's done, there's something wrong with you and I think that's why he was recognized this year.

Q: Was there ever a point you lost faith in the direction the team was headed?

A: No, no, no. I've been around just long enough to have some understanding. I'm not an R.C. or Pop and never will be, but I get it now. No, I'm there to support these guys and I encourage them and I believe in them 110 percent.

Q: How much longer do you believe Tim and Manu might stick around here and, to a lesser extent because he's younger, Tony?

A: You have to ask them. I made my comment: Until they die. Or, as somebody else commented, until their wheels fall off.

Q: Can you see Pop outlasting Tim and Manu?

A: Pop's a coach and that's who he is. He was also a great general manager and great at everything he's ever done in basketball, but it's hard to be a coach and not keep coaching. So I believe he will stay as long as everything else in his life is appropriate, and I'm talking about his health, his wife's health, his family's health, those other things that have nothing to do with basketball, which he's very serious about, particularly the amount of time he's been on the road in this business relative to his family.

But to see him out of coaching would be difficult for him and for us. We don't want him to ever go, but he and I have talked about it, off and on. Not seriously, because he has debated it at times from a life point of view. He is 65 and I am 65 so we have these conversations about getting older and what our families have done to put up with us. And I'm not saying that in a negative way. But we're both very career driven and very ambitious and want to accomplish our goals and sometimes families take a back seat to that and they get tired of it. And I'm not saying he has considered it, but from my personal standpoint only that would be the thing that would change his direction.

Q: Have you considered turning the chairmanship over to someone else?

A: No. I'm not going anywhere.

Q: This may seem trivial, but where will the fifth championship banner hang? It seems there isn't room right next to the other four and those rodeo banners.

A: (Laughter) I hadn't thought about that. I bet we'll find a place. Our partners in the rodeo, we always work things out. Nice problem to have.

mikemonroe@express-news.net