In a functional competitive market companies are constantly churning (creative destruction in accordance with J. Schumpeter). Take the computer industry. My father worked for Burroughs from the 70s through the 80s (as a side note most "computer" companies from this age got their start making adding machines or type writers). The largest computer company by far was IBM and most of the programing was done on punch cards using using COBOL. The PC market kicked in in the late 1970s and by the early 1980s the older main frame computer companies began to falter. By the late 1980s PC computers were being made by new companies including Apple, Swan and Gateway to name a few. My wife was learning C and C++ (while I wallowed away learning FORTRAN). Then came Microsoft in the early 1990s marking the end of market dominance for my father's generation of companies along with his job prospects. By the 2000s the market was no longer dominated by a computer making company but had switched to software manufacturing. Today the dominant computer companies are generally internet companies and I don't even know what language they code in (Java?).
Point I'm trying to make here is in some industries there are no "Grandfather" companies in dominance because there is so much market "churn" no one is able to hold the top spot for long (think "king of the mountain" game). Contrast that with other markets like Banking, Insurance and Energy where the same players hold the top spots and dominate the markets for generations. I'd also note that these "Grandfather" markets tend to be heavily regulated offering some companies the ability to manipulate the regulatory framework to limit competition or give advantages to themselves.
= new reply since forum marked as read
