Understood that fitness monitoring is a feature, which is why hospitals, insurance, businesses, etc may find the Fitbit more attractive due to the MUCH lower cost. If I'm a physician looking to monitor my patients remotely, I'm NOT going to give them an iWatch. I'm going to give them the base model Fitbit.
I'm not sure the "market" is the same if you compare the two. The iWatch has many many more bells and whistles that aren't needed for simple health monitoring. It's a different market altogether.
I don't see this as "competition" for the Apple watch. Certain Fitbit models are cheaper and more accessible to the masses. Case in point . . . see below:
Think of the medical technology industry and hospitals providing Fitbits for patients who can then be monitored at home. Heart rate, exercise and other stats could be uploaded via patient portals so recovery and/or progress can be monitored remotely. The same could be said about general practitioners and primary care physicians too. Empower and encourage patients to be healthier via exercise.
Think of the insurance industry. Folks who exercise regularly and can now prove it via fitbit stats could receive discounted rates.
Think of wellness in general. Certain Fitbit models are cheap enough so they could be purchased in bulk and given away as company perks for staying healthy. A healthy employee is less likely to call in sick . . .
At the right price point, I see this as a bigger deal than the iWatch.
This goes beyond simply wearing a device on your wrist. This will enable trending and collection of big data too.