Mentor Capital, Inc. MNTR US Equity
Mentor Capital, Inc. (OTC: MNTR), an SEC filer in Investors, NEC, closed at $0.03, +3.7%, on 2026-08-28, with a market cap of $830,438 as of 2026-08-27, a return on equity of -22.0%, a net margin of -344.2% and 3-year sales growth of 68.2%. Institutional ownership, earnings history and filed financials are on the tabs below.
Legal & controls
Item 3 and Item 9A as filed · every verdict is the registrant’s own sentence, printed below it · a filing that fails an extraction gate reads “not extracted”
| Fiscal year | Filed | Item 3 | ICFR | disclosure controls | material weakness | Filing |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-12-31 | 2026-04-15 | described here | not extracted | not extracted | remediated (prior year) | EDGAR |
Item 3 · G FarmaLabs Limited On August 27, 2021, the Company and Mentor Partner I, LLC settled certain litigation with G FarmaLabs Limited, a Nevada corporation, and certain of its affiliates (the “G Farma Settlors”). The G Farma Settlors partially performed, and then breached, the Settlement Agreement. Consequently, in February 2023, the Company and Mentor Partner I filed a Request for Entry of Judgment seeking entry of a stipulated judgment against the G Farma Settlors for (1) the remaining unpaid settlement amount of $494,450 promised, all accrued and unpaid interest thereon, and an additional $2,000,000 principal amount as agreed in the Settlement Agreement, (2) the Company’s incurred costs, and (3) attorneys’ fees paid by the Company to obtain the judgment. On July 11, 2023, the Court entered judgment against the G Farma Settlors and in favor of Mentor and Partner I in the amount of $2,539,597, which is comprised of $2,494,450 principal (calculated as the aggregate settlement amount, less payments made by the G Farma Settlors, plus the default addition) plus accrued and unpaid interest of $40,219, costs of $1,643, and attorneys’ fees of $3,285 incurred by Mentor and Mentor Partner I in… Item 9A · disclosure controls · As a result of the Company’s small size and limited number of employees, management assessed and concluded that the Company’s internal control over financial reporting, internal controls, and disclosure controls was not considered effective as of December 31, 2025. Item 9A · material weakness · Based on this evaluation, management has learned that due to the small size of the Company and its limited number of employees, it identified a material weakness in the Company’s internal control over financial reporting related to the lack of sufficient segregation of duties and detailed separate reviews of journal entries that are prepared and reviewed by management and a CPA. | ||||||
| 2024-12-31 | 2025-03-31 | described here | effective | effective | none in Item 9A | EDGAR |
Item 3 · G FarmaLabs Limited On August 27, 2021, the Company and Mentor Partner I settled certain litigation with G FarmaLabs Limited, a Nevada corporation, and certain of its affiliates (the “G Farma Settlors”). The G Farma Settlors partially performed, and then breached, the Settlement Agreement. Consequently, in February 2023, the Company and Mentor Partner I filed a Request for Entry of Judgment seeking entry of a stipulated judgment against the G Farma Settlors for (1) the remaining unpaid settlement amount of $494,450 promised, all accrued and unpaid interest thereon, and an additional $2,000,000 principal amount as agreed in the Settlement Agreement, (2) the Company’s incurred costs, and (3) attorneys’ fees paid by the Company to obtain the judgment. On July 11, 2023, the Court entered judgment against the G Farma Settlors and in favor of Mentor and Partner I in the amount of $2,539,597, which is comprised of $2,494,450 principal (calculated as the aggregate settlement amount, less payments made by the G Farma Settlors, plus the default addition) plus accrued and unpaid interest of $40,219, costs of $1,643, and attorneys’ fees of $3,285 incurred by Mentor and Mentor Partner I in conn… Item 9A · ICFR · Based on this evaluation, management concluded that our internal control over financial reporting was effective as of December 31, 2024. Item 9A · disclosure controls · Based on management’s evaluation, our chief executive officer and principal financial officer concluded that, as of December 31, 2024, our disclosure controls and procedures are designed at a reasonable assurance level and are effective to provide reasonable assurance that information we are required to disclose in reports that we file or submit under the Exchange Act is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in SEC rules and forms and that such information is accumulated and communicated to our managers, including our chief executive officer and principal financial officer, as appropriate, to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure. | ||||||
| 2023-12-31 | 2024-04-01 | described here | effective | effective | none in Item 9A | EDGAR |
Item 3 · G FarmaLabs Limited On August 27, 2021, the Company and Mentor Partner I settled certain litigation with G FarmaLabs Limited, a Nevada corporation, and certain of its affiliates (the “G Farma Settlors”). The G Farma Settlors partially performed, and then breached, the Settlement Agreement. Consequently, in February 2023, the Company and Mentor Partner I filed a Request for Entry of Judgment seeking entry of a stipulated judgment against the G Farma Settlors for (1) the remaining unpaid settlement amount of $494,450 promised, all accrued and unpaid interest thereon, and an additional $2,000,000 principal amount as agreed in the Settlement Agreement, (2) the Company’s incurred costs, and (3) attorneys’ fees paid by the Company to obtain the judgment. On July 11, 2023, the Court entered judgment against the G Farma Settlors and in favor of Mentor and Partner I in the amount of $2,539,597, which is comprised of $2,494,450 principal (calculated as the aggregate settlement amount, less payments made by the G Farma Settlors, plus the default addition) plus accrued and unpaid interest of $40,219, costs of $1,643, and attorneys’ fees of $3,285 incurred by Mentor and Mentor Partner I in conn… Item 9A · ICFR · Based on this evaluation, management concluded that our internal control over financial reporting was effective as of December 31, 2023. Item 9A · disclosure controls · Based on management’s evaluation, our chief executive officer and principal financial officer concluded that, as of December 31, 2023, our disclosure controls and procedures are designed at a reasonable assurance level and are effective to provide reasonable assurance that information we are required to disclose in reports that we file or submit under the Exchange Act is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in SEC rules and forms and that such information is accumulated and communicated to our managers, including our consulting chief executive officer and principal financial officer, as appropriate, to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure. | ||||||
| 2022-12-31 | 2023-03-28 | described here | effective | effective | none in Item 9A | EDGAR |
Item 3 · G FarmaLabs Limited On May 28, 2019, Mentor Capital, Inc. and Mentor Partner I, LLC filed a complaint in the Superior Court of California in the County of Marin for, among other things, breach of contract against G FarmaLabs Limited, Atanachi (“Ata”) Gonzalez, Nicole Gonzalez, G FarmaLabs DHS, LLC, GFBrands, Inc., fka G FarmaBrands, Inc., Finka Distribution, Inc., G FarmaLabs WA, LLC, and Goya Ventures, LLC (together “Defendants”). Under the complaint, among other things: ● Mentor Capital, Inc. alleged that G FarmaLabs Limited and Ata Gonzalez and Nicole Gonzalez as guarantors of the G Farma obligations had failed to perform their several obligations under a Note Purchase Agreement and two secured Promissory Notes dated March 17, 2017, as amended. At December 31, 2019, the aggregate amount due, owing, and unpaid under both Notes is $1,045,051. Interest of approximately $67,770 is also due but has not been accrued in the financial statements due to uncertainty of collection. ● Mentor Partner I, LLC alleged that G FarmaLabs Limited, G FarmaLabs DHS, LLC as Lessees and GFBrands, Inc, Ata Gonzalez, and Nicole Gonzalez as guarantors of the lease obligations had failed to perform their s… Item 9A · ICFR · Based on this evaluation, management concluded that our internal control over financial reporting was effective as of December 31, 2022. Item 9A · disclosure controls · Based on management’s evaluation, our chief executive officer and principal financial officer concluded that, as of December 31, 2022, our disclosure controls and procedures are designed at a reasonable assurance level and are effective to provide reasonable assurance that information we are required to disclose in reports that we file or submit under the Exchange Act is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in SEC rules and forms and that such information is accumulated and communicated to our managers, including our consulting chief executive officer and principal financial officer, as appropriate, to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure. | ||||||
| 2021-12-31 | 2022-03-24 | described here | effective | effective | none in Item 9A | EDGAR |
Item 3 · G FarmaLabs Limited On May 28, 2019, Mentor Capital, Inc. and Mentor Partner I, LLC filed a complaint in the Superior Court of California in the County of Marin for, among other things, breach of contract against G FarmaLabs Limited, Atanachi (“Ata”) Gonzalez, Nicole Gonzalez, G FarmaLabs DHS, LLC, GFBrands, Inc., fka G FarmaBrands, Inc., Finka Distribution, Inc., G FarmaLabs WA, LLC, and Goya Ventures, LLC (together “Defendants”). Under the complaint, among other things: ● Mentor Capital, Inc. alleged that G FarmaLabs Limited and Ata Gonzalez and Nicole Gonzalez as guarantors of the G Farma obligations had failed to perform their several obligations under a Note Purchase Agreement and two secured Promissory Notes dated March 17, 2017, as amended. At December 31, 2019, the aggregate amount due, owing, and unpaid under both Notes is $1,045,051. Interest of approximately $67,770 is also due but has not been accrued in the financial statements due to uncertainty of collection. ● Mentor Partner I, LLC alleged that G FarmaLabs Limited, G FarmaLabs DHS, LLC as Lessees and GFBrands, Inc, Ata Gonzalez, and Nicole Gonzalez as guarantors of the lease obligations had failed to perform their s… Item 9A · ICFR · Based on this evaluation, management concluded that our internal control over financial reporting was effective as of December 31, 2021. Item 9A · disclosure controls · Based on management’s evaluation, our chief executive officer and principal financial officer concluded that, as of December 31, 2021, our disclosure controls and procedures are designed at a reasonable assurance level and are effective to provide reasonable assurance that information we are required to disclose in reports that we file or submit under the Exchange Act is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in SEC rules and forms and that such information is accumulated and communicated to our managers, including our consulting chief executive officer and chief financial officer, as appropriate, to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure. | ||||||
5 of 5 annual reports on record have their filing text cached on this host; the rest are listed with their EDGAR link and no extraction, because this surface never fetches from SEC on a page load.
- Item 3 and Item 9A are located in the filing HTML already cached on this host and read with the same line-anchored item matcher and largest-gap body disambiguation the filing-narrative pass uses for Item 1A and Item 7 — no fetch, no model, no summarization.
- A heading is accepted as a section only when it is not a table-of-contents row (a trailing page number), not a quoted reference in prose, and names its own section; the span must then clear a per-item length band and carry readable text after the heading. Anything that fails a gate is served as 'not extracted' with the reason — never as a default value.
- An effectiveness conclusion is read only from a sentence that names its own control set (disclosure controls and procedures, or internal control over financial reporting) and states an outcome. Conditional sentences — the standard limitations paragraph and forward-looking remediation language — are excluded, because they are hypotheses rather than conclusions.
- When a filing's own sentences disagree — an effective conclusion beside an unremediated material-weakness disclosure, or two conclusions of opposite sign — no verdict is asserted. A wrong 'controls were effective' reading is worse than no reading.
- Every verdict is shown beside the verbatim sentence it was read from. The excerpt is the filing's own words, capped at 1,200 characters; the filing itself is one link away.