Hmm. Really? That's weird. I heard ItsJustSomeRandomGuy say it during a review of Star Trek 11 on his video chat. He loved the movie. I rather liked the term when I heard him coin it.I am simply saying that if the old stuff is Prime Universe, does it not mean that the new is Sub-Prime?
Err, no. I think you're basing that on the "subprime mortgages" that have been in the news lately, but that's a specialized definition of the word, i.e. "at less than the prime interest rate." In other contexts, "subprime" means "inferior, lower in quality." It's a negative value judgment.
The "prime" in "Prime Universe" is not being used in the sense of "best" or "most important," but merely in the sense of "first, original."
http://www.blogtv.com/Shows/614880/date/bm3FY2PHaeZxbeZGZX
Oh and here's some of his work.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wus6Hp664XI
Perhaps it's the Double Prime universe, ala Lagrange notation?

Perhaps so but it ruins the in-joke if it wasn't the same Archer from Enterprise.
Not necessarily. Why couldn't Jonathan Archer's son or daughter, or grandson or granddaughter, have inherited his love of beagles?
Because that overthinks the joke. Admiral Archer is pretty clearly meant to be Jonathan Archer himself. The movie may not say as much, but the audience is supposed to presume as much.