Actually, the Soviet Union didn't even fail for its lack of markets. It failed because entry and exit to economic activity was restricted, so no new ideas ever really got tried.
Remember, command economies work so well when the leadership knows what they're doing that they make up the structure of every successful business in "market capitalist" countries.
I agree with your first ideas, but not the last. There are successful companies that have allowed significant independence to the lower levels of management and employees to a point where I wouldn't class all companies command economies in any strongly centralized sense.
Also, the failure to generate new economic activity (or supressing new activity) is a prevalent theme in failed companies. Furthermore, when you look at new innovative products coming out of large companies, you'll often spot a phase goes something like: "A small group of employees broke off and put together <widget> after hours or out of sight of the upper management, etc". The new activity or market areas often come in spite of the controls in big companies.
Remember, command economies work so well when the leadership knows what they're doing that they make up the structure of every successful business in "market capitalist" countries.