> If corporations couldn’t offer new stock, they’d lose access to their primary source of funds. IPOs and VC rounds wouldn’t exist, for example. Not necessaril

> If corporations couldn’t offer new stock, they’d lose access to their primary source of funds. IPOs and VC rounds wouldn’t exist, for example. Not necessarily. [Major] Shareholders could sell part of their stock and invest in company or as in OP's case not sell all issued stock right away. I think OP's point is that majority shareholders by issuing more shares dilute themselves at the expense of all shareholders, i.e. it is possible to issue more shares by diluting major shareholder 80% -> 60%, than by selling 25% of their holdings). I agree that new money could be a catalyst for further growth and increase total value held by each shareholder, but shares are also ownership and share dilution irrecoverably reduces ownership stake. I guess that was OP's point