It just happens I’m a member here (and a pretty experienced traveler), and my comment has no bearing on moderation. But thanks for sharing your opinion...

But, I’ll ask one question here: given AA employees’ reported errors on this issue, which would one prefer? The satisfaction of being right - and missing a day (possibly more) in Shanghai, including the possible loss of hotel night or even bookings - or being protected in case Agent Ratched decides to take up angst and rigidity against one? The problem is AA doesn’t train their staff, and one can not count on customer orientation, knowledge of immigration and TWOV fine print or consistency.

It’s obvious TWOV to you, to me, and very likely to the China immigration authorities. To AA when the connection is short, I’d not make that bet. As I stated, “I’ll ask one question here: given AA employees’ reported errors on this issue, which would one prefer? The satisfaction of being right - and missing a day (possibly more) in Shanghai, including the possible loss of hotel night or even bookings - or being protected in case Agent Ratched decides to take up angst and rigidity against one? The problem is AA doesn’t train their staff, and one can not count on customer orientation, knowledge of immigration and TWOV fine print or consistency.”

I understand the intention behind purchasing an alternative air ticket out, but that has to be balanced against giving incorrect information to Chinese immigration by (a) the check-in agent entering details into the system before departure and (b) by the passenger on arrival.

On balance I'd rather be giving Chinese immigration the correct information - otherwise it may raise concerns if they're expecting an air-air transit passenger who turns out to be air-sea. Chinese immigration do check and confirm onward travel.

As a back up it might work. If AA refuses uplift the OP could go ahead and buy a fully refundable ticket, be allowed to board, but then present the cruise ticket out of Shanghai once they arrive at the TWOV desk in Shanghai. That may cause some confusion and delays, but better than being denied boarding outright.

LAX-NRT-PVG-KUL-LAX is most certainly compliant. I don't consider myself an "advocate" of TWOV, but the rules are crystal clear.

I'm a bit conflicted on this point because of the long thread we had last summer (in which AA screwed up big time). That having been said, I also dislike the refundable ticket idea. In the event AA improperly denies the OP boarding, he can presumably sort things out a day later...with compensation. To me, this is a better option than jail in China.

I would much rather AA deny me boarding and get compensated than risk the ire of Chinese immigration officials over a fraudulently purchased flight.

Don't worry about LAX, as LHR/MEL/Europe FF states, its SAN where the incorrectly denying boarding would happen. That's is where the determination is made. You cant take the domestic leg if you don't meet for the intl leg. Make sure to get to SAN with extra time just in case.

Used to work back in the day but not so much now that they check. Obviously wont cause as much trouble as someone who would have not met entry requirements without using the "fake" ticket

Be careful here. I had my docs OK's at RDU but got blocked in ORD (connection to PVG) because they kept refusing to read past the first section of TIMATIC. Took a lot of persuasion and a few phone calls, but then allowed onboard ONLY if we agreed to pay for any fines/airfares if rejected by China. Nothing happened when we arrived.

Sounds like some ground staff is overpowering their own ego and job description. I had one in Madrid airport few years back.

Why the worry about giving incorrect information to Chinese immigration? There’s no necessity for that - it’s improperly trained AA staff that are the problem, and a backup ticket, which I ordinarily would not recommend, would be to remediate possible AA staff intransigence. As others have pointed out, SAN is the most likely problem point. The backup ticket can be cancelled easily prior to arriving in China, and there’s no need to disclose other than the actual travel itinerary to Chinese authorities.

AA will likely pass on the incorrect information to PRC border control.

And ... all of this seems like a lot of machinations to avoid a $140 fee for a visa allowing multiple entries over 10 years. It's not as if this is a huge fee or a complicatged process.

Think of it as travel insurance. No need to argue with gate agents over interpretations of Timatic which has occurred on several European and US airlines. Plus, it gives time to work through any complications for travel into China since not every law abiding US citizen will be granted a Chinese visa. Better to know that now rather than when standing in line at PVG immigration.

And, I'll add that I'm old enough to have enjoyed sneaking across the French border without a visa during the years it was required. Then I realized, just pay the money and get the stamp and not worry about getting kicked out of a country.

Point taken, but it's not exactly just $140. Considering Visa agent fees along with the fact that there are 2 of us, probably closer to $450. If we truly don't need to pay that, I'm inclined to investigate traveling without a Visa. Not saying I won't get one, but I hate spending money and wasting time needlessly.

You're probably right. That being said, I know three people who were denied tourist visas to visit China -- none of whom thought they were at risk of being denied a visa. One had booked a very expensive tour in an alumni group with his wife. While those three found out when their tourist visas were rejected, I suspect it would have been a much more difficult situation if they were at PVG immigration.

Certainly, most people don't have issues with getting tourist visas but some do -- and that's in addition to issues regarding TWOV interpretation.

Seems to me if I was doing a cheap fare to PVG for a weekend, the risk of either having TWOV issues or being denied admission isn't that significant. On the other hand, if I was joining a very expensive tour it would be. So, if we're an exchange of information on FT rather than promoting or advocating, we should identify the risk. As the US State Department advises: "Exercise increased caution in China due to the arbitrary enforcement of local laws."