Basically, companies and laboratories implement production methods for their electrodes on the basis of experience, technical capabilities and commercial preferences. But how does one know whether they have ended up with the best possible electrode for the components used? What should be the (i) optimal thickness of the catalyst layer? (ii) relative amounts of electronically conducting component (catalyst, with support – if used), electrolyte and pores? (iii) “particle size distributions” in these mesophases? We may be pleased with our MEAs, but could we make them better? The details of excellently working MEA structures are typically not a subject of open discussion, also hardly anyone in the fuel cell business would like to admit that their electrodes could have been made much better. Therefore, we only rarely find (far from systematic) experimental reports on this most important issue. The message of this paper is to illustrate how strongly the MEA morphology could affect the performance and to pave the way for the development of the theory. Full analysis should address the performance at different current densities, which is possible and is partially shown in this paper, but vital trends can be demonstrated on the linear polarization resistance, the signature of electrode performance. The latter is expressed through the minimum number of key parameters characterizing the processes taking place in the MEA. Model expressions of the percolation theory can then be used to approximate the dependence on these parameters. The effects revealed are dramatic. Of course, the corresponding curves will not be reproduced literally in experiments, since these illustrations use crude expressions inspired by the theory of percolation on a regular lattice, whereas the actual mesoscopic architecture of MEA is much more complicated. However, they give us a flavour of reserves that might be released by smart MEA design.