Unless you are involved in research & development , most have less than no idea about the monumental costs involved and the amount of time needed to find solutions then impliment them.
In many cases it can take decades to recover the costs from the previous upgrade in which time the EPA decides you have to make 2 more.
Because the market is so competiative, no 2 factories will share their research results but no single one can afford to do the research.
Don't know where you got the 40% from, that sound way too high.
Advertisers do all sorts of tricks with figures like setting upper & lower limits that include their most popular engine and exclude their competitors most popular engines.
Or start & end dates for the previous year that includes the oppositions new engine release . Wholesale sales so a switch to their engine ups their figures or retail sales so a switch to a competitors engine is excluded.
I doubt that any manufacturer would ever have 40% of the overall market, then, now or any time in the future unless we end up with only one brand of engine.
A simple example is BSA's claim of 1 in 4 motorcycles were BSA.
This was true at the end of WW II as all of the European factories had been bombed into oblivion so the 4 was basically UK, USA, Canada , Spain & tiny Australia.
Post WW II there was a fuel shortage and most European countries set a size limit between 100 cc to 250 cc. and the USA's biggest factory Indian closed down because Harlies were so cheap they could not compete.
So after WWII it was 1 in 4 motorcycles ( over 100cc )
Then it went to 1 in 4 motorcycles ( over 100cc and excluding scooters ).
Then it went to 1 in 4 motorcycles ( over 100cc and excluding scooters and step throughs )
So right up till the late 60's the BSA group (included Triumph & Ariel by then ) still maintained the false 1 in 4 claim where as by then they were less than 5% of total world production if you included all 2 wheelers.