One of the reasons that the statute of frauds requires that certain contracts be in writing is because proof of the contract (and the terms within) is easier than if the contract is verbal, but written contracts are sometimes several pages long and contain legal terms that may mean something that most of us do not understand. If you were entering into a contract, would you rather have a written contract that was several pages long and that you might have to spend some time reading to understand or a verbal contract that you and the other party have discussed and that you understand from that discussion? Why? Would the content of the contract make a difference?